The  Conscientious  Objectors 
of  New  Zealand  and  "The 
Process  of  their  Conversion" 

By  H  E  HOLLAND,  M.P. 


'  Mrs  Ballantyne  asked  for  an  assurance 
that  the  lads  would  not  be  subjected  to 
persecution  during  the  voyage  to  England. 
Sir  James  Allen  replied  that  they  would 
be  subjected  to  no  persecution  whatever. 


Digitized  by  tine  Internet  Arciiive 

in  2007  witii  funding  from 

IVIicrosoft  Corporation 


littp://www.arcliive.org/details/armageddonorcalvOOIiolliala 


3  1822  02466  4732 


p  ^uj;  %'/i 


ARMAGEDDON 
OR    CALVARY 


THE   CONSCIENTIOUS  OBJECTORS 

of  New  Zealand  and  "The  Process 

of  their  Conversion  " 


By  H.  E.  HOLLAND.  M.P. 


n 


WELLINGTIN.    N.Z. 
P:- :■;  ■ '•:r.'    B.     Thj-    }/:^o-vr.\.\-A:-   Wopr;=^s    Pp:N^i-;:-   and    Pi'e;.:5h;v- j,   Co.   Ltp. 
AND   P-jB;,;c>H^i   -■■■    H     E.    Ho:.!.\N'  .     207  Ha-:->    Valley   Roao.    Brooklyn 


THE    C.O's. 

Their  names  are  writ  in  every  Clink — 
This  small  but  steadfast  band 

Who  for  themselves  have  dared  to  think 
And  firmly  take  their  stand. 

The  tyrants'  boast  to  crush  and  kill 

And  this  proud  spirit  bend 
Does  only  strengthen  each  man's  will , 

To  conquer  in  the  end. 

Although  to-night  in  prison  cell 
'Neath  Mammon's  lock  and  key, 

It  only  holds  the  earthly  shell — 
The  mind  and  soul  are  free. 

The  Brotherhood  of  Man's  their  aim  ; 

So  come  whate'er  betide 
They'll  bear  it  all  m  Freedom's  name, 

Their  conscience  is  their  guide. 

Though  each  should  fill  a  Martyr's  grave, 
What  grander  end  could  be  ? 

Their  death  will  only  help  to  pave 
The  road  to  Liberty. 

D.  BAXTER. 
In  Detention, 

July  26,   1917. 


FOREWORD. 

The  publication  of  this  book  may  be  said  to  have  a  three-fold 
purpose.  It  is  written  to  turn  the  searchlight  of  publicity  on  a  policy 
which  had  we  been  wise  should  never  have  been  written  into  the 
Statutes  of  this  country;  secondly,  to  make  known  some  of  the  shock- 
ing experiences  the  men  of  conscience  were  called  upon  to  undergo 
and  the  terrible  price  they  were  required  to  pay  for  their  crime  of 
holding  conscientious  objections  to  military  service;  and,  finally,  to 
make  it  impossible  for  such  a  stupendous  wrong  to  ever  again  sully 
the  annals  of  this  country  with  the  record  of  its  atrociousness. 

To  this  end  I  have  sought  to  place  the  book  before  the  public  in 
advance  of  the  General  Election.  It  is  imperative  that  the  electors 
should  k«ow  the  lengths  to  which  a  Government,  having  clothed  itself 
with  military  despotism,  in  arrogant  disregard  of  the  wishes  of  the 
people,  found  it  possible  to  go  in  its  determination  to  t  anslate  into 
practice  the  theories  of  the  military  extremists.  This  being  so,  and 
because  the  General  Election  cannot  be  much  longer  delayed,  the  work 
of  compilation  has  had  to  be  done  in  great  haste  and  often  during  in- 
tervals snatched  from  the  crowded  hours  which  belong  to  strenuous 
campaigning. 

1  wish  to  thank  Messrs.  Brown  and  Briggs  (Palmerston  North;  the 
Social  Democratic  Party  (Wellington),  the  National  Peace  Council  of 
New  Zealand  (Christchurch).  the  Labour  Representation  Committee, 
(Gisborne),  the  Auckland  Waterside  Workers'  Union,  Mr.  and 
Mrs.  R.  W.  S.  Ballantyne,  Messrs.  Ronald  S.  Badger,  Burns, 
Smith,  Begg,  and  Mofflt,  and  other  friends  for  placing  sufficient  funds 
at  my  disposal  to  cover  the  cost  of  publication.  I  also  wish  to  thank 
Mr.  J.  Glover,  manager  of  "The  Maoriland  Worker"  for  having  turned 
the  work  out  at  little  more  than  the  cost  of  production;  the  conductor 
of  the  Country  Worker's  Page  for  advance  notices  in  successive  issues; 
"The  Worker"  mechanical  staff  for  the  manner  in  which  they  have 
cheerfully  co-operated  in  hastening  the  production  of  the  book,  as  well 
as  for  the  excellence  of  their  work;  and  Mrs.  Beck,  of  the  Women's 
International  Leasue,  for  assistance  in  compiling  lists  of  imprisoned 
e.O.'s. 

Whatever  profits  accrue  from  the  sale  of  this  book  will  be  devoted 
to  the  fund  for  providing  for  the  maintenance  of  the  wives  and  child- 
ren of  imprisoned  and  victimised  Conscientious  Objectors. 

H.E.H. 


TO    THE   WOMEN 
WHO    SUFFERED 


ARMAGEDDON 
OR    CALVARY 


I.— INTRODUCTORY. 

The  war  period  revealed  that  there  were  four  types  of  Con- 
scientious  Objectors   to  Military  Service   in  New   Zealand. 

On  the  one  hand  we  had  the  Religious  Objectors,  who  took  much 
the  same  view  of  Military  Service  as  was  held  by  the  early  Christians. 
They  obstinately  persisted  in  bestowing  a  literal  interpretation  on 
the  command  of  the  Galilean  Carpenter:  "Thou  shalt  not  kill";  and, 
even  as  the  early  Christians  were  hurled  among  dreadful  serpents, 
flung  into  the  lions'  den,  or  nailed  to  the  Roman  cross,  so  these  latter- 
day  Christians  were  ready  to  pay  the  penalty  for  their  life  principles, 
whether  through  pitiless  years  i  i  the  gloom  of  the  prison  cell  or 
grimly  before  the  guns  of  the  firing  party.  Stella  Benson,  in  her  novel, 
"This  is  the  End."  says:  "You  must  take  either  Christianity  or  War 
seriously — hardly  Ijoth."  The  extreme  Christians  of  New  Zealand 
chose  to  take  Christianity  seriously,  and  it  was  unfortunate  for  them 
that  our  War  Legislation  forbade  literal  interpretations  of  the  funda- 
mentals of  Christian  teaching.  Prior  to  the  war  there  were  few  in- 
deed who  would  not  have  conceded  that  the  anti-war  slogan  of  the 
Carpenter  was  a  profound  morality.  The  War  Regulations,  however, 
made  it  an  offence  punishable  with  a  year's  jail  to  propagate  the 
command:  "Thou  shalt  not  kill,"  and  it  became  a  matter  for  the 
practical  Christian  of  choosing  between  Christ  and  the  War  Regula- 
tions. 

Different  in  many  ways  from  the  Christian  Objectors  were  the 
Socialist  Objectors;  of  these  there  were  some  thou.sands.  The  Christian 
Objector  is  always  a  Pacifist.  Sometimes  the  Socialist  is  a  Pacifist; 
often  he  isn't.  There  are  many  Socialists  who  wouldn't  fight  under 
any  circumstances  whatever.  Again,  the  Socialists  are  legion  who — 
while  they  would  avoid  war  as  long  as  it  could  be  avoided — would 
tight  to  the  death  in  a  struggle  to  liberate  mankind  from  Capitalism. 
Generally  speaking,  the  Socialist  Objector  bases  his  objection  on  the 
fact    thai    wars   arc   never   made  bv   the   workers   nor   yet   in   their   in- 


ARMAGEDDON   OR   CALVARY. 

terests,  but  have  their  foundations  in  the  quarrels  of  the  national 
capitalists  over  markets  and  for  economic  supremacy.  "The  interests 
of  the  workers  of  all  countries  are  identical,"  said  the  Socialist 
Objector;  "there  is  no  reason  whatever  why  they  should  kill  one 
another  in  their  masters'  quarrels."  And,  of  course,  he  immediately 
found  himself  up  against  the  Military  Service  Act  and  the  War  Regu- 
lations. 

Of  a  different  type,  again,  were  the  Irish  Objectors.  Often,  of 
course,  the  Irishman  is  a  Christian;  often  he  is  a  Socialist;  some- 
times he  is  neither.  It  is  seldom  that  he  is  a  Pacifist;  once  in  a 
hundred  years  you  will  find  a  Sheehy  SkeflBngton — and  Skefflngton 
was  of  English  descent,  anyhow.  When,  during  the  recent  war,  many 
Irishmen  in  New  Zealand  objected  to  military  service,  their  objection 
was  not  based  on  either  a  Christian  or  a  Socialist  reason;  its  founda- 
tion was  historical.  They  protested  that  the  Irish  had  never  been 
voluntary,  but  always  compulsory,  subjects  of  England,  and  that, 
therefore,  they  ought  not  to  be  required  to  fight  in  England's  wars. 
In  support  of  this  objection,  they  called  in  evidence  seven  hundred 
long  and  terrible  years  of  history — years  of  oppression  and  repres- 
sion, of  recurring  artificial  famine,  of  overflowing  prisons,  of  cruel 
evictions  numbered  by  the  million,  of  a  country  depopulated  by  mis- 
rule. Their  history  was  sound;  their  case  was  strong.  But  the  War 
Regulations  reached  them  notwithstanding. 

The  Maori  Objectors  were  again  of  a  different  type.  In  some  re- 
spects the  Maori  Objector  resembled  the  Irish— with  the  difference, 
of  course,  that  the  Maori  belongs  to  a  different  historical  period  from 
his  white  brother.  The  Maori  Objectors  came  mostly  from  the  Waikato 
Tribe.  They  are  not  Pacifists;  from  time  immemorial  they  have  been 
a  warlike  people.  The  reasons  on  which  ther  objection  was  founda- 
tioned  are  to  be  found  in  the  history  books — particularly  Rusden's 
History. 

Of  course,  every  Conscientious  Objector  did  not  go  to  prison— nor 
yet  to  the  hills.  Men  with  families  had  bitter  reason  to  know  that,  if 
they  placed  high  principle  first  and  chose  the  prison,  those  most  dear 
to  them  in  life  would  suffer  hardship  and  hunger,  want  and  misery. 
And  so,  out  of  their  great  love  for  the  little  children  whose  bread- 
winners they  were,  out  of  the  love  they  bore  the  good  women  whose 
life-mates  they  were,  they  made  the  supreme  sacrifice  of  principle 
and  went  "marching  down  to  Armageddon,"  heavy-hearted,  it  is  true, 
out  still  with  the  pitiful  assurance  that  whether  they  lived  or  whether 
they  died  their  loved  ones  would  be  saved,  however  miserably,  from 
the  ravages  of  hunger.  The  others  resolutely  shouldered  the  Cross, 
and,  "with  the  moral  courage  of  a  God"  (as  the  Dismissed  Dominie 
has  written  it),  unfalteringly  directed  their  steps  towards  the  gloomy 
summit  of  the  modern  Calvary. 

For  there  was  no  other  alternative.  It  was  either  Armageddon  or 
Calvary. 

6 


II.— THE   COMING   OF   CONSCRIPTION. 

Immediately  following  the  outbreak  of  war  in  1914,  Sir  James 
Allen,  without  consulting  either  Parliament  or  the  people,  hastened  to 
promise  to  the  British  military  authorities  an  Expeditionary  Force  of 
8000  men,  and  to  maintain  this  at  full  strength  for  the  period  of  the 
war.  No  sooner  was  this  promise  made  than  the  people  were  being 
sternly  reminded  that  they  must  "honour  their  obligations,"  etc.  The 
first  Expeditionary  Force  numbered  7761,  necessitating  a  monthly 
reinforcement  of  1100  men;  and,  notwithstanding  the  almost  un- 
thinkable terms  offered  the  volunteers,  so  great  was  the  response  to 
the  call  for  men  that  the  Main  Body  was  speedily  increased  by  addi- 
tions from  the  Reinforcements.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  by  the  time  of 
the  Gallipoli  retreat  we  were  supplying  reinforcements  on  a  Main 
Body  strength  of  14,000  men — nearly  double  the  number  originally 
promiseu  by  Sir  James  Allen.  Later  this  strength  rose  to  20,000, 
and  still  later  to  considerably  more;  until  we  were  sending  away  drafts 
of  from  2200  to  26^0  men  every  four  weeks — more  than  double  the 
original  reinforcements.  The  more  thoughtful  men  now  began  to 
recognise  that  New  Zealand  was  being  bled  white  in  the  matter  of  the 
physically  best  of  its  manhood. 

The  1914  General  Election  was  fought  out  in  December,  when  the 
war  fever  was  at  its  height,  and  only  here  and  there  the  voice  of 
Reason  found  itself  capable  of  rising  above  the  frenzied  din.  The 
election  was  remarkable  for  the  sham  fight  staged  by  the  Reform  and 
Liberal  Parties;  ])ut  neither  Tory  nor  Liberal  "Patriot"  dared  to  lift 
a  serious  voice  in  advocacy  of  the  imposition  of  Conscription.  The 
election  was  no  .sooner  over,  however,  than  the  two  anti-Labour  Parties 
began  to  make  overtures  to  each  other,  and  in  due  time  an  alliance 
was  entered  into,  and  the  National  Government  was  formed. 

Following  hard  on  the  heels  of  this  event,  a  section  of  the  press 
commenced  an  insidious  propaganda  in  support  of  Conscription  for 
New  Zealand.  The  best-informed  men  in  the  Labour  movement  had  no 
illusons  concerning  the  idea  that  was  in  the  minds  of  the  military 
propagandists.  It  was  fairly  clear  that  the  papers  wanted  Conscrip- 
tion, not  so  much  to  defeat  the  Germans  as  to  defeat  the  people  of 
New  Zealand. 

The  papers  became  more  and  more  insistent  in  their  demands,  and 
at  last  certain  minor  politicians  began  to  say — somewhat  timorously 
at  first,  and  then  more  brazenly — that  they  "would  support  Conscrip- 
tion if  it  should  be  found  that  we  could  not  otherwise  keep  our  obli- 
gations to  the  Empire." 

It  was  now  the  task  of  the  capitalist  press  to  "prove"  that  only  by 
the  adoption  of  Conscription  could  we  honour  "our  obligations  to  the 
Empire";  and  this  it  proceeded  to  do. 

When   Labour   began   to   raise   its   protests   against   the   danger   of 


ARMAGEDDON   OR   CALVARY. 

Prussian  Militarism  being  fastened  on  this  country  (I  had  the  honour, 
by  the  way,  of  sounding  the  first  warning  note  in  the  leading  columns 
of  "The  Maoriland  Worker,"  of  which  paper  I  was  then  editor),  the 
Tory-Liberal  leaders  at  first  denied  that  they  contemplated  such  a, 
move.  A  little  later  we  found  them  saying  that  they  would  only  resort 
to  Conscription  if  it  was  necessary  to  do  so  to  enable  us  to  "keep 
our  obligations  to  the  Empire."  Sir  Joseph  Ward  was  indiscreetly 
frank.  He  told  a  Dunedin  audience  that  he  knew  that  Conscription 
was  Prussian  Militarism;  still,  he  said,  in  effect,  he  "would  vote  for 
it  if  it  was  necessary  to  enable  us  to  keep  our  obligations  to  the 
Empire."  From  this  more  or  less  camouflaged  attitude  to  the  open 
declaration  that  Conscription  was  necessary  to  enable  us  to  "honour 
our  promises  to  the  Empire"  was  but  a  short  step.  But  both  press 
and  anti-Labour  politicians  smothered  up  the  fact  that  Sir  James 
Allen's  original  and  unauthorised  promise  had  been  kept  under  Volun- 
taryism with  interest  at  from  100  to  200  per  cent. 

Swift  in  the  wake  of  the  campaigning  for  Conscription  came  the 
intimation  that  a  "National  Register"  of  the  country's  manhood  was 
to  be  taken.  In  "The  Maoriland  Worker"  I  voiced  the  protest  that 
this  was  the  first  real  step  towards  Conscription.  Other  men  raised 
similar  protests  on  the  public  platform.  The  Labour  movement  began 
to  awaken — all  too  late,  unfortunately.  As  the  protests  poured  in,  the 
Government  deemed  it  advisable  solemnly  to  pledge  its  word  to  the 
people  that  the  Register  was  to  be  a  purely  civil  census,  and  would 
not  be  used  in  any  way  in  connection  with  Conscription.  How 
flagrantly  that  pledge  was  dishonoured  was  demonstrated  when  the 
first  Conscription  ballot  was  drawn  and  it  was  found  that  the  very 
cards  signed  by  the  men  for  the  purposes  of  the  National  Registei- 
were  the  cards  that  were  drawn  by  the  girls  from  the  boxes  in  the 
Statistician's  office  when  the  marble  numbers  were  called.  At  all 
subsequent  ballots  the  National   Register  cards   were  similarly   used. 

All  men  over  19  years  of  age  were  required  to  legister;  but  only 
from  those  between  19  and  45  were  replies  demanded  as  to  their 
willingness  or  otherwise  to  undertake  military  service.  The  men  of 
this  age  who  registered  numbered  195,341.  Of  these  33,785  declared 
that  they  would  not  undertake  service  at  home  or  abroad,  while  44.338 
were  unwilling  to  undertake  service  abroad,  but  stated  their  willing- 
ness to  do  home  .'service.  So  that  78,123  men  declared  against  being 
sent  abroad  for  war  service. 

The  men  who  expressed  themselves  willing  to  undertake  military 
service  abroad  numbered  119,778.  Of  these  a  very  substantial  majority 
(61,704)  were  married  men,  while  16,876  were  single  men  with  depend- 
ents. Only  34,103  single  men  without  dependents  intimated  their  will- 
ingness to  go  abroad. 

The  Register  was  thus  a  clear  indication  that  a  huge  majority  of 
eliKiblo  men  were  against  Conscription;  for — side  by  side  with  the 
emphatic  answer  of  the  single  men — there  was  the  hard  fact  of  the 


tup:  coming  ov  (X)NSckii'tion. 

Government's  pledge  that  the  Register  was  not  to  be  used-  for 
military  purposes,  and  the  further  fact  that  very  many  married  men 
for  obvious  reasons  replied  "Yes,"  believing  that  the  married  men 
would  never  be  called  upon.  It  was  at  this  time  the  general  opinion 
that  the  single  men  would  fill  all  the  gaps. 

Presuming  on  the  "Yes"  majority — an  altogether  misleading  quan- 
tity— the  Conscriptionists  became  more  aggressive  in  their  demands; 
and  the  Labour  movement  replied  with  the  great  Anti-Conscription 
Conference  of  January,  1916,  at  which  200  organisations  were  repre- 
sented, and  which,  with  one  dissentient  only,  denounced  Conscription. 
From  this  Conference  was  issued  the  memorable  Anti-Conscription 
Manifesto,  which  extracted  a  wild  scream  from  every  profiteering 
interest,  agent,  and  political  lackey  in  the  land.  The  Manifesto  de- 
manded the  highest  trade  union  wa.s^es  for  the  soldiers  and  the  com- 
mandeering of  all  incomes  over  a  soldier's  wage.  This  to  ensure  a 
semblance  of  "equality  of  sacrifice"  on  the  part  of  the  wealthy.  A. 
S.  Neill,  the  gifted  author  of  "A  Dominie  Dismissed,"  once  met  a  titled 
lady  and  discussed  war  matters  with  her.  After  she  had  gone  he  was 
asked  what  he  thought  of  the  English  aristocracy,  and  gave  his  opinion 
in  these  words:  "To  the  English  aristocracy  property  alone  is  sacred. 
That  woman  has  .tjiven  the  lives  of  her  two  sons  willingly  for  her 
country,  but  if  she  were  asked  to  give  half-an-acre  of  her  estate  to 
help  pay  for  the  war  she  would  go  mad  with  rage  and  disgust."  Cap- 
tain Donald  Simpson  said  something  similar  about  certain  pro- 
fiteers in  New  Zealand.  The  thunderburst  of  rage  and  disgust  which 
greeted  the  proposal  of  the  Labour  Conference  to  take  the  money  of 
the  wealthy  (for  whose  property  interests  the  soldiers  were  fighting) 
for  war  purposes  left  the  marks  of  its  forked  lightning  flame  scorched 
black  in  the  columns  of  the  yellow  press  and  burnt  deep  in  the 
memories  of  the  audiences  who  listened  while  certain  anti-Christian 
religionists  among  the  politicians  raved  on  select  and  secluded  plat- 
forms. 

While  the  Labour  Conference  was  discus.sin;:  ways  and  means  of 
saving  New  Zealand  from  the  iron  grip  of  Prussian  Militarism,  Mr. 
W.  M.  Hushes  and  .Mr.  W.  F.  .Massey  were  meeting  secretly  at  Auck- 
land -undoubtedly  for  the  purpose  of  discussing  the  application  of 
Conscription  to  the  Commonwealth  and  the  Dominion.  Mr.  Hughes 
had  adopted  a  not  very  coiira.geous  method  of  getting  away  from  Aus- 
tralia. He  had  caused  it  to  be  known  that  he  purposed  sailing  for 
London  by  a  boat  due  to  leave  .Melbourne.  He  had  organised  a  send-off 
for  himself  at  Sydney  station,  and  had  sreamed  outward  and  south- 
ward to  the  stage-managed  cheer.s  of  hi.s  official  admirers.  He  had 
gone  a  few  miles  out  of  Sydney,  and  had  then  left  the  train,  and,  re- 
turning to  the  metropolis,  had  been  taken  in  a  launch  to  the  Auckland 
boat  lying  in  the  stream,  leaving  the  Germans  to  believe  he  was  sailing 
from  Melbourne,  and  consequently  leaving  the  Melbourne  boat  to  he 
regarded  as  lawful  prey  by  the  submarines   if  they  really  wished  to 


ARMAGEDDON   OR   CALVARY. 

get  Mr.  Hughes — a  matter  about  which  I  have  my  own  doubts.  At 
Auckland,  as  I  have  indicated,  Mr.  Hughes  was  secretly  met  by  Mr. 
Massey.  The  Censorship  was  employed- to  prevent  the  people  of  this 
country  from  knowing  that  Mr.  Hughes  was  here  or  that  he  and  Mr. 
Massey  were  conferring.  The  following  telegram,  dated  January  22, 
1916,  was  sent  to  the  editors  of  the  various  papers:  — 

"The  Hon.  Mr.  W.  M.  Hughes.  Prime  Minister  of  the  Common- 
wealth, is  arriving  in  New  Zealand  shortly.  You  are  strictly  pro- 
hibited from  making  any  mention,  reference,  or  allusion  to  this  fact 
or  to  his  movements  whilst  in  the  Dominion  or  to  his  departure  there- 
from.—C.  H.  GIBBON,  Colonel,  Chief  of  the  General  Staff,  and  Military 
Authority  under  the  War  Regulations  Act." 

After  his  meeting  with  Mr.  Massey — a  conference  which,  no  doubt, 
had  to  do  with  the  subsequent  military  history  of  this  country — the 
Australian  Prime  Minister  sailed  for  London,  where  to  the  British 
Militarists  he  duly  pledged  the  country  he  nominally  represented  to 
adopt  Conscription.  On  the  strength  of  his  military  policy  he  was 
lionised  in  certain  quarters  and  actually  taken  seriously.  But  his 
stock  fell  when  he  failed  on  his  return  to  Australia  to  make  good  in 
the  matter  of  his  rash  promises.  Happily  for  the  cause  of  human 
freedom,  however  unhappily  for  Mr.  Hughes,  his  own  party  promptly 
dealt  with  him  for  his  apostasy,  repudiated  his  pledge  for  the  Prus- 
sianising of  Australia,  compelled  him  to  submit  the  matter  of  Con- 
scription to  a  vote  of  the  people  (by  whom  it  was  twice  decisively  re- 
jected), and  eventually  hurled  him  in  disgrace  and  political  dishonour 
from  their  ranks,  and  left  him  hissing  and  spitting  vituperatively  from 
the  outer  darkness  at  the  working  men  he  had  successfully  duped  for 
over  twenty  years. 


III.— THE    DIVISION    LISTS. 

Mr.  Massey  and  Sir  Joseph  Ward,  tor  their  part,  were  taking  no 
chances  in  the  matter  of  trusting  the  people  to  decide  the  question 
of  Conscription  or  No  Conscription.  They  led  a  supine  majority  in 
Parliament,  a  majority  that  moved  obediently  at  every  crack 
of  the  two-thonged  whip.  And  so.  on  May  31,  1916,  the  Con- 
scription Bill  (labelled  the  Military  Service  Bill)  was  introduced,  and 
sledKC-hammered  through  Parliament,  carrying  in  its  final  stage  with 
only  five  dissentients. 

Consistently  the  Parliamentary  Labour  Party,  consisting  of  only 
four  men,  fought  the  measure  through  all  its  stages.  In  this  fight 
alone  the  Labour  Party  justified  its  political  existence.  On  every 
division  the  four  Labour  men  voted  the  right  way. 

10 


THE   DIVISION   LISTS. 

The  vote  on  the  second  reading  of  the  Bill  was  reached  on  June 
1,  and  47  members  voted  with  the  Ayes,  and  five  with  the  Noes,  while 
four  members  paired. 

The  members  voting  for  Conscription  were: — Allen,  Anderson,  An- 
stey,  Buddo,  Buick,  Craigie,  J.  M.  Dickson,  J.  S.  Dickson,  Ell,  T.  A.  H. 
Field,  W.  H.  Field,  Forbes,  Fraser,  Guthrie,  Harris,  Herries,  Hornsby, 
Hudson,  Isitt,  Jennings,  MacDonald,  McNab,  Mander,  Massey,  Myers, 
A.  K.  Newman,  E.  Newman,  Ngata,  Nosworthy,  Okey,  Pearce,  Pomare, 
Poole,  R.  H.  Rhodes,  T.  W.  Rhodes,  Russell,  Scott,  Smith,  Statham, 
W.  Stewart,  Sykes,  Talbot,  Veitch,  Witty,  Wright,  Wilford,  Young. 

The  members  who  voted  against  Conscription  were: — HIND- 
MARSH,  McCOlMBS,  WALKER,  WEBB,  Payne. 

McCallum  .  and  Sidey  paired  with  the  Ayes,  and  Thacker  and 
Fletcher  with  the  Noes. 

The  House  went  into  Committee,  and  on  June  6  a  division  was 
taken  on  the  question  of  forcing  boys  of  20  to  the  trenches,  and  re 
suited: — AYES:  Allen,  Anderson,  Anstey,  Craigie,  J.  M.  Dickson,  J.  S. 
Dickson,  Fraser,  Guthrie,  Hanan,  Harris,  Henare,  Herdman,  Herries, 
Hornsby,  Hudson,  Hunter,  Jennings,  MacDonald,  McNab,  Malcolm, 
Mander,  Massey,  Myers,  A.  K.  Newman,  E.  Newman,  Ngata,  Nosworthy, 
Okey,  Pomare,  Poole,  Russell,  Scott,  Sidey,  Statham,  W.  Stewart, 
Sykes,  Talbot,  Veitch,  Wilkinson,  Wright,  Young.  NOES:  Colvin,  Ell, 
T.  A.  H.  Field,  W.  H.  Field,  Fletcher,  McCallum,  McCOMBS,  Payne, 
Poland,  T.  W.  Rhodes,  Smith,  WALKER,  WEBB,  Wilford,  Witty. 
Ward  paired  with  the  Ayes,  and  HINDMARSH  with  the  Noes.  The 
Ayes  numbered  41 — or  just  one  more  than  half  the  strength  of  the 
House. 

On  June  6  a  motion  was  tabled  in  favour  of  raising  the  military 
age  to  55.  Against  this  the  Government  made  a  resolute  stand.  The 
voting  resulted:— AYES:  Anderson,  Colvin,  Ell,  T.  A.  H.  Field,  Mc- 
Callum, McCOMBS,  McNab,  Payne,  Poland,  Smith,  WALKER,  WEBB, 
Wilford.  NOES:  Allen,  Anstey,  Craigie,  J.  M.  Dickson,  J.  S.  Dickson, 
W.  H.  Field,  Fletcher,  Fraser,  Guthrie,  Hanan,  Harris,  Henare,  Herd- 
man,  Herries,  Hornsby,  Hudson,  Hunter,  Isitt,  MacDonald,  Mander, 
Massey,  Myers.  A.  K.  Newman,  E.  Newman,  Ngata,  Nosworthy,  Okey, 
Pomare,  Poole,  T.  W.  Rhodes,  Russell,  Scott,  Sidey,  Statham,  W. 
Stewart,  Sykes,  Veitch,  Wilkinson,  Witty,  Wright,  Young.  HIND- 
MARSH  paired  with  the  Ayes,  and  Ward  with  the  Noes. 

On  the  same  date  it  was  resolved,  by  43  votes  to  0,  to  place  tm- 
married  men  with  dependents  in  the  First  Division,  the  four  Labour 
men  voting  with  the  minority,  and  Veitch,  the  Wanganui  "indepen- 
dent," with  the  majority. 

On  June  7  the  House  divided  on  the  question  of  exempting  Relig- 
ious Objectors.  The  division  list  stands: — AYES:  Allen,  J.  M.  Dickson, 
i:il,  T.  A.  H.  Field,  Guthrie,  Hanan,  HINDMARSH,  Isitt,  Jennings, 
McCOMBS,  Massey,  Okey.  Payne.  Poland,  Poole,  Talbot,  WALKER, 
WEBB,  Wilkinson,  Witty,  Wright.     NOES:     Anderson,  Anstey,  Craigie, 

11 


ARMAGEDDON   OR    CALVARY. 

W.  H.  Field,  Fletcher,  Fraser,  Harris,  Herdman,  Herries,  Hornsby, 
Hudson,  Hunter,  MacDonald,  Mander,  McNab,  Myers,  A.  K.  Newman,  E. 
Newman,  Nosworthy,  Pomare,  R.  H.  Rhodes,  T.  W.  Rhodes,  Russell, 
Scott,  Smith,  W.  Stewart,  Sykes,  Veitch,  Young.  On  this  occasion,  only 
50  members,  out  of  a  House  of  80,  voted;  and  it  stands  on  record  that 
the  refusal  to  recognise  the  Religious  Objector  was  carried  by  only 
29  members — a  fraction  more  than  a  third  of  the  House.  Many  mem- 
bers appear  to  have  deliberately  absenfed  themselves. 

On  the  same  date  the  clause  in  the  Bill  which  provided  up  to  five 
years'  jail  with  hard  labour  (in  addition  to  liability  under  the  Army 
Act)  for  Conscientious  Objectors  and  military  defaulters  was  voteil 
upon.  The  list: — AYES:  Allen,  Anderson,  Anstey,  Brown,  Buick, 
Craigie,  J.  M.  Dickson,  J.  S.  Dickson,  Ell,  T.  A.  H.  Field,  W.  H.  Field, 
Fraser,  Guthrie,  Hanan,  Harris,  Henare,  Herdman,  Herries,  Hornsby, 
Hudson,  Hunter,  Isitt,  Jennings,  MacDonald,  McNab,  Mander,  Massey, 
Myers,  A.  K.  Newman,  E.  Newman,  Nosworthy,  Okey,  Pomare,  Poole, 
R.  H.  Rhodes,  T.  W.  Rhodes,  Russell,  Scott,  Sidey,  Smith,  Statham, 
W.  Stewart,  Talbot,  Veitch,  Wilford,  Wilkinson,  Witty,  Wright,  Young. 
NOES:  Fletcher,  HINDMARSH,  McCOMBS,  Payne,  Poland,  WEBB. 
Ward  paired  with  the  Ayes,  and  WALKER  with  the  Noes. 

On  June  8  the  House  divided  on  the  clause  providing  for  fine  and 
imprisonment  for  employers  retaining  in  their  employ  Conscientious 
Objectors.  The  list: — AYES:  Allen,  Anstey,  Bollard,  Brown,  Buick. 
Craigie,  Dickie,  J.  M.  Dickson,  W.  H.  Field,  Fraser,  Forbes,  Guthrie, 
Hanan,  Harris,  Henare,  Herdman,  Herries,  Hornsby,  Hudson,  Hunter, 
McCallum,  MacDonald,  McNab,  .Mander,  Massey,  Myers,  A.  K.  Newman, 
E).  Newman,  Nosworthy,  Okey,  Pearce,  Pomare,  R.  H.  Rhodes,  T.  W. 
Rhodes,  Russell,  Scott,  Sidey,  Smith,  Statham,  W.  Stewart,  Sykes, 
Talbot,  Thacker,  Veitch.  Ward,  Wilford,  Wilkinson,  Witty,  Wright, 
Young.  NOES:  Colvin,  Ell.  Fletcher,  HINDMARSH,  Isitt,  Jennings, 
McCOMBS,  Payne,  Poland,  Poole,  WALKER.  WEBB. 

On  the  same  date  the  House  again  divided  on  the  clause  which 
gave  the  police  power  to  question  and  arrest  without  warrant  men  of 
military  age.  The  list: — AYES:  Allen,  Anstey.  Bollard,  Buick,  Craigie, 
J.  .M.  Dick.son,  Ell,  T.  A.  H.  Field,  W.  H.  Field,  Forbes,  Fraser, 
Guthrie,  Hanan,  Harris,  Henare,  Herdman,  Herries,  Hornsby,  Hunter, 
Isitt,  Jennings.  .MacDonald,  McNab,  Mander,  Massey,  Myers,  E.  New- 
man, Nosworthy,  Okey,  Pearce.  Pomare,  R.  H.  Rhodes,  T.  W.  Rhodes, 
Russell,  Scott,  Sidey,  Smith,  .Statham,  W.  Stewart,  Sykes,  Talbot, 
Thacker,  Veitch,  Wilkinson,  Witty.  Wright,  Young.  NOES:  Fletcher, 
HINDMARSH,  McCOMBS,  A.  K.  Newman.  Payne,  Poland,  Poole, 
WALKER.      Ward  paired     with  the  Ayes,  and  WEBB  with  the  Noes. 

On  the  same  date  yet  another  division  was  taken  on  a  clause  which 
provided  a  fine  of  £50  for  persons  knowing  the  whereabouts  of 
Conscientious  Objectors  and  military  defaulters  and  failing  to  in- 
form. The  four  Labour  men,  one  indepcMident,  and  one  Liberal  voted 
or  paired  against  the  proposal,  and  }.")  members  (including  Veitch) 
voted  with  the  Ayes.  12 


THE    DIVISION    LISTS. 

On  the  same  date  the  House  was  divided  on  the  clause  giving 
Cabinet  power  to  end  the  voluntary  system  of  enlistment  by  procla- 
mation. Forty-five  members  (including  Veitch)  voted  and  two  paired 
with  the  Ayes.  The  four  Labour  members,  one  independent,  a»d  one 
Liberal  either  voted  or  paired  with  the  Noes. 

The  third  reading  of  the  Bill  was  taken  on  June  9— the  Government 
was  determined  to  lose  no  time  in  militarising  the  country — and  the 
list  showed:— AYES:  Allen,  Bollard,  Buick.  Colvin,  Dickie,  Ell,  T.  A.  H. 
Field,  W.  H.  Field,  Forbes,  Eraser,  Guthrie,  Hanan,  Herdman,  Herries, 
Hornsby,  Hudson,  Jennings,  McCallum,  MacDonald,  McNab,  Malcolm, 
Mander,  Massey,  Myers,  A.  K.  Newman,  Nosworthy,  Pomare,  Poole, 
R.  H.  Rhodes,  T.  W.  Rhodes,  Russell,  Scott,  Sidey,  Smith,  W.  Stewart, 
Sykes,  Talbot,  Thacker,  Veitch,  Wilford,  Wilkinson,  Witty,  Wright, 
Young.  NOES:  Fletcher,  McCOMBS,  Payne,  WEBB.  E.  Newman  and 
Ward  paired  with  the  Ayes,  and  HINDMARSH  and  WALKER  with  the 
Noes. 

It  should  be  noted  that  Thacker,  who  had  voted  against  the  second 
reading,  changed  his  mind  and  voted  for  the  third  reading. 

By  the  end  of  July,  the  unpopularity  of  the  Government's  actioti. 
supported  by  Parliament,  was  abundantly  manifest;  and  on  August 
4  the  House  was  divided  on  the  question  of  extending  its  own  life — 
in  other  words,  the  proposal  was  to  disfranchise  the  whole  of  the 
electors  of  New  Zealand  until  December,  1918.  It  appeared  to  the 
Labour  Movement  that  this  step  was  deliberately  taken  to  ensure 
that  the  people  should  have  no  opportunity  of  dealing  with  the  men 
who  had  so  grossly  betrayed  them.  For  this  amazing  proposal,  41 
members  (one  more  than  half  the  strength  of  the  House)  voted. 
Nineteen  members  who  were  not  out  of  New  Zealand  absented  them- 
selves. The  division  list:- — AYES:  Anderson,  Allen,  Bollard,  Buddo, 
Buick,  J.  M.  Dickson,  J.  S.  Dickson,  Ell,  W.  H.  Field,  Fraser,  Glover 
Guthrie,  Hanan,  Harris,  Henare,  Herdman,  Herries,  Hudson,  Hunter, 
Isitt,  Jennings,  MacDonald,  McNab,  Malcolm,  Mander,  Massey,  Myers, 
E.  Newman,  Nosworthy,  Okey,  Poland,  Pomare,  R.  H.  Rhodes,  Russell, 
Scott,  Stathani,  Stewart,  Sykes,  Thomson,  Ward,  Young.  NOES:  An- 
stey,  Craigie,  T.  A.  H.  Field,  Fletcher,  HINDMARSH.  McCOMBS,  A.  K. 
Newman,  Payne,  T.  W.  Rhodes,  Talhot.  Veitch,  WALKER,  WEBB. 
Wilford,  Witty,  Wright. 

In  the  April  session  of  1918,  the  House  again  extended  its  own  life 
— i.e.,  disfranchised  the  whole  of  the  electors — for  a  further  period  of 
a  year:  until  the  end  of  1919.  So  the  Parliamentarians  who  imposed 
Prussian  Militarism  on  the  people  took  good  care  that  the  outraged 
people  should  be  deprived  of  all  means  of  co»stitutional  redress.  It 
is  for  the  people  to  pronounce  on  this  line  of  conduct  at  the  forth- 
coming general  election. 


13 


IV.—  THE  FLOOD-TIDE  OF  REPRESSION. 

No  sooner  was  the  campaign  for  Conscription  seriously  entered 
upon  than  the  large  halls,  principally  in  the  metropolis,  were  closed 
against  the  Labour  Movement.  Even  the  Wellington  Town  Hall  was 
refused  for  the  purpose  of  holding  a  public  meeting  under  the 
auspices  of  the  Labour  Party  to  discuss  the  proposal.  The  proprietors 
of  a  local  theatre  tore  up  their  agreement  with  the  Social  Demo- 
cratic Party;  and  when  the  people  filled  the  Alexandria  Hall  to  over- 
flowing and  hundreds  clamoured  outside  for  Anti-Conscrip- 
tionist  speakers  to  address  them,  the  speakers — Mr.  P.  C.  Webb,  M.P., 
Miss  Adela  Pankhurst,  and  the  author — were  prosecuted  and  penalised 
on  a  charge  of  "obstructing  the  traffic."  notwithstanding  that  Abel- 
Smith  Street  on  Sunday  evening  is  positively  devoid  of  traffic.  On 
the  same  day,  Mr.  W.  F.  Massey  addressed  a  crowd  in  Cuba  Street — 
one  of  the  city's  busiest  thoroughfares;  but  the  class  line  was  drawn 
far  too  rigidly  to  permit  of  any  prosecution  in  his  case. 

The  repressive  War  Regulations  multiplied  with  the  enactment  of 
Conscription.  Detectives  were  told  off  to  follow  up  Labour  meetings, 
and  in  due  time  Hansard  reporters  were  sent  to  take  verbatim  reports 
of  Labour  speeches.  When  in  December,  1916,  the  second  great 
Anti-Conscription  Conference,  representing  50,000  workers,  was 
Bitting,  detectives  appeared  with  orders  to  demand  admittance — a  de- 
mand which  was,  however,  not  complied  with.  Mr.  Peter  Fraser 
(now  M.P.  for  Wellington  Central),  secretary  of  the  Conference,  was 
arrested  while  Conference  was  sitting;  and  the  arrests  of  Messrs. 
Brindle,  Armstrong,  and  a  number  of  others  followed  in  rapid  suc- 
cession. Messrs.  Semple  and  Cooke  had  been  arrested  a  few- 
days  earlier.  Almost  half  the  effective  platform  propagandists 
of  the  Labour  Movement  were  placed  behind  prison  bars.  Then  the 
pursuit  of  the  men  who  voiced  Labour  sentiments  became  still  more 
determined.  For  months,  at  every  meeting  I  addressed — it  did  not 
matter  what  the  subject  was — a  "Hansard"  stenographer  took  a  ver- 
batim report  at  the  press  table,  while  a  detective  took  notes  in  the 
body  of  the  hall  (apparently  for  the  purpose  of  checking  the  short- 
hand reporter's  notes),  while  two  or  three  other  detectives  were  also 
in  the  body  of  the  hall. 

A  system  of  far-reaching  espionage  became  part  of  the  official 
programme.  The  letters  of  the  Government's  principal  anti-mili- 
tarist opponents  were  subjected  to  a  censorship  intended  to  be  secret, 
but  so  clumsily  carried  out  that  it  told  its  own  tale.  For  consider- 
ably more  than  a  year  every  letter  which  came  to  myself,  whether 
addressed  to  my  home  or  office,  was  opened  and  read  and  then  re- 
closed  neither  neatly  nor  with  regard  for  method  or  cleanliness.  My 
letters  were  held  up  for  periods  which  ranged  from  three  days  to  a 
month.       Letters   to   my   wife   from  our  sons   in  Australia   were  sub- 

14 


THE   FLOOD-TIDE   OF   REPRESSION. 

jected  to  the  same  scrutiny.  Even  the  Christmas  cards  which  came 
addressed  to  our  children  did  not  escape.  This  was  not  my  exper- 
ience alone.  It  was  the  experience  of  every  person  prominent  in  the 
Labour  movement,  the  Peace  Council,  the  Freedom  League,  the 
Women's  League,  and  other  organisations  whose  work  menaced  the 
interests  of  the  Prussianists  and  the  Profiteers.  Of  course,  it  was 
inevitable  that  in  due  time  intelligence  methods  would  be  developed 
within  the  Labour  movement  which  would  render  the  system  of 
espionage  largely  ineffective. 

About  this  time  two  determined  attempts  were  made  from  within 
to  induce  Cabinet,  by  War  Regulation,  to  make  it  an  act  of 
sedition  to  advocate  the  Parliamentary  repeal  of  Conscription.  For- 
tunately for  New  Zealand — perhaps,  also,  for  the  Prussian-minded 
men  responsible  for  the  proposal — the  infamous  attempt  against 
Constitutionalism  was  not  agreed  to  by  Cabinet. 

Early  in  1917  there  came  the  first  miners'  go-slow  strike,  consti- 
tuting an  effort  to  secure  a  llh  per  cent,  wages  increase  to  enable  the 
miners  to  meet,  to  some  small  extent,  the  enormous  increase  in  the 
cost  of  living,  which  increase  was  largely  the  direct  outcome  of  war 
profiteering.  The  Miners'  Executive  members  were  dragged  away 
to  jail,  and  a  new  Executive  came  into  office;  whereupon  the  rank 
and  file,  going  over  the  heads  of  the  Executive,  declared  a  strike 
against  Conscription.  The  strike  was  eventually  called  off  as  the 
result  of  a  bargain  between  the  Acting-Prime  Minister  and  the  Min- 
ister of  Mines  on  the  one  hand  and  the  Miners'  Federation  on  the 
other  hand,  practically  guaranteeing  that  the  miners  would  not  be 
conscripted  for  the  army,  and  that  the  men  concerned  in  the  strike 
would  not  be  prosecuted.  Needless  to  say,  the  terms  of  the  bargain 
were  not  honoured  in  their  entirety,  for  the  ink  was  scarcely  dry  on 
the  signatures  when  Messrs.  O'Brien  and  O'Rourke  were  arrested 
and  sent  to  jail. 

As  a  result  of  the  strike,  Mr.  P.  C.  Webb,  M.P.  for  Grey,  was 
arrested  on  May  Day  of  1917,  held  without  bail,  and  at  last  sentenced 
to  three  months'  jail.  On  his  release  he  was  accorded  a  reception 
by  thousands  of  citizens  of  Grey,  Westland,  and  Buller,  which  lives 
as  the  greatest  event  in  the  history  of  the  West  Coast. 


v.— SIDE-STEPPING    THE    LAW. 

Parliament  first  of  all  emphatically  refused  to  exempt  the  Con- 
scientious Objector,  as  the  Division  List  of  June  7,  1916,  shows.  Then, 
for  a  reason  yet  to  be  explained,  Parliament  changed  its  extraordinary 
mind,  and  proceeded  to  make  provision  for  the  exemption  from  com- 
batant service  of  men  who  could  prove  that,  prior  to  August  4,  1914, 
they  belonged  to  a  religious  organisation  opposed  to  military  service. 

15 


ARMAGEDDON    OR    CALVARY. 

When  the  Bill  was  sent  to  the  Legislative  Council  on  June  9  it  con- 
tained the  following , condition  on  which  a  balloted  man  might  secure 
exemption:- — 

"That  he  was  on  the  fourth  day  of  August,  1914,  and  has  since 
continuously  been  a  member  of  a  religious  body  the  tenets  and  doc- 
trines of  which  declare  the  bearing  of  arms  and  the  performance  of 
any  combatant  service  to  be  contrary  to  divine  revelation,  and  that, 
according  to  his  own  conscientious  religious  belief,  the  bearing  of 
arms  and  the  performance  of  any  combatant  service  is  unlawful  by 
reason  of  being  contrary  to  divine  revelation." 

It  will  be  noted  that  this  severely  excluded  recognition  of  the  in- 
dividual religious  conscience  except  as  the  auxiliary  of  the  collective 
conscience  of  an  organisation.  It  denied  to  the  Anglican,  Catholic, 
Presbyterian,  Methodist,  Salvationist  Objector  the  right  of  individual 
conscience.  To  the  Socialist,  Irish  and  Maori  Objector  it  denied  the 
right  of  either  a  collective  or  an  individual  conscience.  It  only  left 
the  way  of  exemption  on  conscientious  grounds  open  to  the  members 
of  the  Society  of  Friends,  Christadelphians,  and  one  or  two  other  small 
bodies.  Even  in  their  cases  it  was  insisted  that  they  must  appear 
for  medical  examination,  attestation,  etc.  And  again,  even  to  these 
objectors  it  only  gave  exemption  from  "combatant"  service;  it  offered 
the  alternative  of  "non-combatant"  service;  and,  of  course.  In  a  mul- 
titude of  cases,  the  extreme  religious  conscience  revolted  against  any 
k\nd  of  war  work. 

The  printed  document  to  be  signed  by  the  Objector  set  forth  that: 
"I,  (Blank),  having  appealed  to  a  Military  Board  on  the  ground  of  my 
religious  objections  to  military  service,  hereby  undertake,  if  my 
appeal  is  allowed  on  that  ground,  faithfully  and  willingly  to  perform 
such  non-combatant  work  or  services  as  may  be  required  of  me  in 
accordance  with  regulations  made  under  the  Military  Service  Act, 
1916,  and  at  such  rate  of  payment  as  may  be  prescribed  by  such  re- 
gulations." 

On  June  7  the  House  divided  on  a  proposal  to  deprive  the  Con- 
scientious Objectors  of  their  citizen  rights  for  a  period  of  ten  years, 
and  the  proposal  was  defeated  by  33  to  23.  The  division  list: — AYES: 
Allen,  Bollard,  Buick,  J.  M.  Dickson,  Harris,  Henare,  Herdman,  Her- 
rics,  Hornsby,  Hudson,  Mander,  Myers,  E.  Newman,  Nosworthy,  Okey, 
Pearce,  R.  H.  Rhodes,  T.  W.  Rhodes.  Statham,  W.  Stewart,  Wright 
Wilkinson,  Young.  NOES:  Anstey,  Craigie,  Dickie,  Ell,  T.  A.  H.  Field. 
W.  H.  Field,  Fletcher,  Forbes,  Sir  W.  Fraser,  HINDMARSH,  Hunter, 
Isitt,  Jennings,  McCallum,  McCOMBS,  MacDonald,  McNab,  A.  K.  New- 
man, Poland,  Pomare,  Poole,  Russell,  Scott,  Sidey,  Smith,  Talbot, 
Thacktr,  Veitch,  WALKER,  Ward,  WEBB,  Wilford,  Witty. 

By  the  following  session  the  vast  majority  of  the  Tory  and  Liberal 
members  had  somersaulted,  and  a  Bill  was  carried  and  sent  to  the 
Legislalivc  Council  providing  for  deprivation  of  citizen  rights  for 
the    Consrientious    Objectors.       The    Bill,   however,    also    contained   a 


SIDE-STIOPJMNC;    THE    LAW. 

clause  providing  for  the  exemption  of  all  clergymen  and  teachers  (in- 
cludins,  of  course,  the  Marist  Brothers).  This  clause  was  rejected 
by  the  Council,  whereupon  the  Government  dropped  the  whole 
measure.  The  Council's  desire  to  see  the  Marists  conscripted  saved 
the  other  Objectors  in  this  respect  for  the  time  being.  By  the  second 
session  of  1918,  as  we  shall  see,  the  whole  of  the  House,  with  the  ex- 
ception of  the  Labour  members,  had  fallen  under  the  influence  of  th-i 
interests  antagonistic  to  the  men  of  conscience. 

Now,  the  rejection  by  the  Council  of  the  clause  referred  to  left 
the  law  so  that  it  required  that  the  name  of  every  clergyman  and 
theological  student  should  be  placed  in  the  ballot  in  the  order  of  his 
Division.  The  Catholic  clergy  and  teachers,  by  reason  of  their 
celibacy  vows,  came  at  once  into  the  First  Division;  consequently 
the  Catholic  Church  was  the  first  religious  organisation  seriously 
menaced  by  the  Act.  It  was  alleged,  however,  that  the  Government 
had  previously  pledged  itself  to  the  Church  that  the  clergy  and  the 
Marist  Brothers  would  not  be  called  up.  The  "New  Zealand  Times," 
when  the  fact  became  known,  explained  that  the  Government  had 
made  this  bargain  because  it  was  anxious  to  get  Conscription  through 
without  being  tripped  up  by  the  problem  of  the  Conscientious  Ob- 
jector. This  pledge  was  understood  to  mean  that  the  clergy  would 
not  be  balloted.  When  the  "system"  began  to  work,  however,  and 
Bishop  Brodie  and  quite  a  number  of  the  clergy  and  Marist  Brothers 
were  duly  drawn  and  required  to  take  their  chances  before  the  Appeal 
Boards,  the  suspicion  arose  that  another  scrap  of  paper  was  about 
to  be  torn  up,  and  a  determined  spirit  of  resistance  began  to  make  it- 
self felt. 

Plain  speaking  on  the  part  of  influential  Catholics  was  not  without 
its  undercurrent  of  threat.  Archbishop  O'Shea  laid  it  down  that  while 
a  priest  would  cheerfully  expose  his  life  at  the  call  of  duty,  "to  put 
a  rifle  in  his  hand  and  require  him  to  take  the  life  of  another  would 
be  an  outrage  on  the  sanctity  of  his  profession  and  an  outrage  on 
the  Catholic  conscience."'  When  he  was  reminded  that  in  France  the 
priests  were  compelled  to  the  trenches,  he  retorted:  "Well,  the  law 
that  compelled  the  priests  to  fight  in  France  was  passed  by  an  infidel 
Government  for  the  purpose  of  destroying  the  Church."  He  warned 
the  Government:  "Catholics  are  resenting  deeply  the  attempt  to  con- 
script their  clergy,  and  will  resent  it  still  more  if  it  is  persisted  in." 
He  sternly  declared:  "We  will  use  every  means  in  our  power  to  prevent 
it."  He  appealed  to  the  Government  "not  to  persist  in  a  policy  that  we 
look  upon  as  a  useless  persecution  and  will  resent  to  the  end."  Father 
Taylor  w^rote  in  the  leading  daily  papers  protesting  that  it  was  "mon- 
strous" that  a  layman  should  declare  the  clergy  "under  compulsion  to 
carry  arms  and  dip  their  hands  in  the  blood  of  their  fellowmen." 
The  chairman  of  a  Catholic  public  meeting  at  Wellington  denounced 
the  proposal  to  conscript  priests  and  theological  students  as  "a  gross 
outrage."     A  prominent  Wellington  lawyer  at  the  same  meeting  asked: 

17 


ARMAGEDDON   OR   CALVARY. 

"Are  we  going  to  stand  by  and  see  our  priests  sent  to  the  firing  line? 
I  say  no.  Is  there  a  single  male  Catholic  in  the  Dominion  who  will 
not  make  any  sacrifice  to  prevent  a  single  priest  being  sent  to  the 
firing  line?"  The  Wellington  correspondent  of  a  Christchurch  paper 
intimated  that  the  Catholic  clergy  had  a  promise  from  the  Govern- 
ment that  the  clergy  would  not  be  conscripted,  and  that  the  Bishops 
had  been  lulled  by  this  promise,  and  so  had  allowed  the  legislation 
to  proceed  without  protest.  This  correspondent,  pointing  out  that 
Archbishop  O'Shea's  words  had  been  addressed  to  "men  and  women 
of  Irish  blood,  who  knew  something  of  suffering  and  had  not  for- 
gotten," declared  that  "to  them  and  their  offspring  there  would  be  no 
bravado  about  making  a  stand  to  protect  the  priest." 

The  Government  had  sown  the  wind,  and  it  began  to  look  as  if  the 
Church  would  lay  upon  it  the  obligation  of  reaping  the  whirlwind. 
But  for  a  harvesting  of  this  sort  the  Government  had  no  stomach; 
and  accordingly  it  planned  for  a  way  by  which  it  might  escape  from 
an  ugly  situation.  The  method  it  adopted  to  save  itself  fi-om  the 
consequences  of  its  own  unwise  and  unjust  law  was  explained  by  Sir 
James  Allen  to  a  deputation  (of  "a  private  character")  of  represen- 
tative Methodists  and  Presbyterians  which  waited  upon  him  at 
Christchurch  on  February  23,  1917.  Parliament  having  refused  to 
exempt  the  clergy,  this  end  was  to  be  achieved  by  the  Minister  of 
Munitions  sending  to  the  Appeal  Board  in  each  clerical  case  a  certi- 
ficate of  exemption.  All  that  was  necessary  was  that  the  heads  of 
the  respective  churches  should  make  application  on  behalf  of  the 
clergy  for  whom  exemption  was  desired. 

The  Cabinet  could  not  have  been  the  happiest  family  round  about 
this  period,  for  two  days  later  the  Hon.  G.  W.  Russell,  also  deputa- 
tionised  at  Christchurch  (by  the  Ministers'  Association),  said:  "He 
could  not  give  a  specific  reply  to  the  Association  that  a  secret  under- 
taking existed  between  the  Government  and  the  Church" — meaning  the 
Catholic  Church.  But  the  honourable  gentleman  made  it  quite  clear 
that  he  had  considerably  swerved  from  his  former  attitude.  On  the 
previous  June  6  he  had  voted  against  exempting  Religious  Objectors. 
On  June  7  he  had  voted  in  favour  of  jail  with  five  years'  hard  labour 
for  Conscientious  Objectors.  On  June  8  he  had  voted  to  punish  with 
fine  and  imprisonment  an  employer  who  retained  in  his  employ  a 
Conscientious  Objector  refusing  military  service.  On  June  8  also  he 
had  voted  in  favour  of  a  £50  fine  for  persons  who  failed  to  inform 
against  Conscientious  Objectors  refusing  military  service.  Now  he 
told  the  Protestant  ministers  he  was  in  favour  of  exempting  all 
clergymen — "he  could  conceive  of  nothing  more  incongruous  than  that 
a  minister  of  religion  should  be  compelled  to  bear  arms."  It  was 
surely  not  alone  because  he  once  represented  Riccarton  that  his 
dearest  friends  nicknamed  the  present  member  for  Avon. 

It  may  be  explained  here  that  the  Labour  Movement  never  at 
any  time  desired  that  the  clergy  of  any  church  or  the  Marist  Bro- 

18 


SIDE-STEPPING    THE    LAW. 

thers  should  be  conscripted.  Labour  stood  against  Conscription  in 
the  first  place,  and  in  the  second  place  for  the  exemption  of  every 
man,  whether  clergyman  or  layman,  with  conscientious  objections  to 
military  service.  If  a  clergyman  was  an  ardent  militarist,  there 
could  be  no  logical  reason  for  his  desiring  exemption.  But,  of 
course,  all  Christians  who  interpreted  Christian  principle  from  the 
viewpoint  of  the  early  Christians  were  of  necessity  anti-militarists, 
and  the  Labour  movement  desired  that  none  of  these  should  be  re- 
quired to  do  violence  to  their  conscience.  There  was  an  open  way 
by  which  the  principles  of  such  men  might  have  been  respected. 
But  the  Government  did  not  take  that  open  way.  On  the  contrary, 
it  sledge-hammered  its  tyrannical  clauses  through  Parliament,  deny- 
ing the  right  of  a  conscience  to  the  individual,  and  then  when  it 
became  alarmed  at  the  storm  it  had  raised,  it  set  out  to  evade  its 
own  bad  law.  And  although  it  saved  itself  from  coming  into  conflict 
with .  the  Church  over  the  matter  of  the  clergy,  it  went  on  sending 
scores  of  good  Catholics  to  jail  for  the  crime  of  possessing  con- 
sciences, just  as  it  sent  scores  of  good  Socialists,  good  Protestants, 
good  Quakers,  good  Irishmen,  and  others  to  jail  for  the  same  reason. 
From  the  manner  in  which  the  Government  backed  down  before 
the  determination  of  the  Catholic  Church,  the  Labour  movement  has 
one  great  lesson  to  learn:  IT  IS  ORGANISATION  THAT  COUNTS. 
The  Church  had  made  up  its  mind  that  neither  its  preachers  nor  its 
teachers  should  be  sent  to  the  trenches — and  they  were  not  sent.  But 
while  the  Government  stood  beaten  and  afraid  before  the  organised 
strength  of  the  Church,  the  jail  doors  were  swinging  inward  day  by 
day  for  the  representatives  of  Labour.     It  is  organisation  that  counts. 


VI.— BY   PATHWAYS   OF   SORROW. 

The  law — made  by  a  handful  of  men  in  disregard  of  the  will  of  the 
people — duly  came  into  operation,  bringing  a  succession  of  disasters 
in  its  trail.  The  rule  of  despotism  never  fails  to  lower  the  moral 
standards  and  depreciate  the  essential  values.  Deception  now  be- 
came a  part  of  the  national  life;  the  spy  and  the  informer  functioned 
secretly.  Even  the  .Minister  of  Defence  came  to  the  conclusion  that 
it  was  part  of  the  duty  of  a  Member  of  Parliament  to  act  the  part 
of  informer.  From  time  to  time  the  Government  published  lists  of 
the  "wanted"  men,  and  every  list  was  sent  to  each  Member  of  Par- 
liament with  an  accompanying  circular  signed  by  the  Minister  of 
Defence,  which  left  no  doubt  in  the  mind  of  the  M.P.  as  to  what  was 
expected  of  him.     One  of  these  circulars  reads:  — 

"Please  find  enclosed  herewith  a  pamphlet  containing  the  lists  and 
full   particulars  of  soldiers  who  have  been  declared   to  be  deserters 


ARMAGEDDON   OR    CALVARY. 

from  the  various  training  camps,  and  also  lists  of  the  names  of  miss- 
ing reservists  who  have  been  drawn  in  the  various  ballots,  for  whoso 
arrests  warrants  are  still  outstanding  and  in  the  hands  of  the  police. 
I  have  arranged  for  these  pamphlets  and  lists  to  be  sent  to  you  each 
month,  as  there  is  every  probability  that  some  information  might 
come  to  your  knowledge  which  would  be  of  assistance  to  the  military 
authority  in  tracing  these  men.  Should  any  information  reach  you 
at  any  time,  it  would  be  appreciated  if  you  would  communicate  the 
same  to  the  local  police  or  to  the  military  authorities." 

Month  by  month  hundreds  of  unwilling  men  were  forced  into  camp; 
month  by  month  hundreds  were  gazetted  as  deserters.  Month  by 
month  numbers  were  seized  or  gave  themselves  up — some  of  them 
going  into  camp  and  some  into  prison,  when  their  places  in  the 
"Gazette"  were  filled  by  other  names  It  did  not  matter  that  a  man 
had  never  taken  the  oath,  that  he  had  never  passed  a  medical  test, 
that  he  had  positively  refused  to  be  a  soldier.  He  was  held  to  have 
taken  the  oath;  he  was  categoried  as  a  soldier;  he  was  labelled  "de- 
serter," and  treated  accordingly.  Employers  were  forbidden  to  give  him 
work;  his  own  mother  was  liable  to  jail  with  three  years'  hard  labour 
if  she  gave  him  shelter;  his  own  friends  were  liable  to  fine  and  im- 
prisonment if,  knowing  his  whereabouts,  they  failed  to  inform  the 
authorities. 

The  boats  carried  away  hundreds  of  New  Zealand's  best  men — 
openly,  immediately  prior  to  Conscription;  secretly  after  its  enact- 
ment— to  become  exiles  in  distant  lands.  Thousands  became  fugi- 
tives in  their  own  land.  They  moved  from  city  to  city,  from  town  to 
town,  from  district  to  district. 

Hundreds  went  to  the  hills,  and  in  the  wildness  of  the  mountain 
forest  found  a  measure  of  that  freedom  which  had  been  so  ruthlessly 
destroyed  elsewhere.  These  mountain  dwellers,  for  conscience  sake 
and  with  a  fortitude  akin  to  heroism  that  will  never  be  understood 
by  their  detractors,  faced  hardships  that  cannot  be  chronicled.  In 
the  heart  of  the  winter  the  rigours  of  the  season  tested  to  the  limit 
their  almost  superhuman  powers  of  endurance.  Betimes  they  lived 
in  dug-outs;  and  when  the  torrential  rains  of  July  and  August  came, 
they  were  literally  flooded  out.  In  the  summer  months  the  bush 
fires  swept  through  the  mountains  and  drove  them  from  refuge  to 
refuge.  While  their  fellows  were  being  hunted  down  in  the  towns 
by  the  detectives,  they  were  being  tracked  through  the  hills  by  the 
uniformed  police  and  menaced  by  the  would-be  informer. 

Of  necessity,  sorrow  and  suffering — the  ripe  fruit  of  this  national 
wroncr-doing — came  into  the  lives  of  a  multitude  of  people,  desolation 
and  despair  into  a  iniiltituric  of  homes.  The  wives  and  mothers 
suff(r(  d  most.  In  wai-tinic  it  is  ever  the  mother  heart  that  breaks. 
.\oi-  did  the  children  escape;  they  were  made  to  pay  the  bitter  price 
of  want   and  destitution. 

Th<     story    will    never   bo   adequately    written   of   the   brave   woineii 

20 


BY   PATHWAYS   OF    SORROW. 

who  cheerfully  faced  penury,  who,  with  a  love  that  was  divine,  left 
the  little  homes  that  had  been  won  through  long  years  of  sacrifice 
and  went  to  work — as  teachers,  as  nurses,  as  factory  workers,  as 
waitresses,  as  domestic  servants,  as  charwomen — to  provide  for  their 
children  when  the  men  were  deprived  of  the  opportunity  of  working 
for  them;  of  how  they  struggled  through  the  weary  months  and  des- 
perate years  while  the  men  they  honoured  were  wandering  in  exile 
or  languishing  in  prison.  Wide  and  varied,  tragic  and  terrible,  were 
some  of  their  experiences. 

For  more  than  two  years  my  correspondence  file  contained,  in  the 
form  of  a  multitude  of  letters,  different  phases  of  the  story  of  the 
nation's  heartbreak,  particularly  the  record  of  the  agony  of  the 
mothers  and  wives.  For  it  is  one  of  the  wide  glories  of  the  Labour 
movement  that  all  who  are  weary  and  heavy  laden  come  to  us  with 
their  burden  of  sorrow.  During,  the  intolerable  sloth  of  what  ap- 
peared to  be  interminable  months,  there  was  seldom  a  week  that 
some  wife  or  mother,  some  sister  or  sweetheart,  did  not  come  to 
me  with  breaking  heart  and  streaming  eyes  to  tell  the  story  of  the 
liroken  hope  of  her  life. 

a.  wife  whose  husl)and  was  a  CO.  in  refuge,  awoke  on  different  oc- 
casions round  about  midnight  to  a  find  a  plain-clothes  police  officer 
on  her  verandah,  moving  stealthily,  and  evidently  intent  on  discovering 
whether  the  husband  was  home. 

The  mother  of  a  C.O.  was  taken  ill  and  died.  The  CO.  (who  was 
sheltering  in  the  bush)  arranged  that  a  friend  should  visit  his  home 
and  perform  certain  rites  in  his  behalf.  As  the  friend  entered  the 
gate  of  the  residence  where  the  dead  woman  lay,  he  was  suddenly 
seized  by  the  police,  who  had  planned  an  ambush  anticipating  that 
the  son  would  come  back  to  take  a  last  sad  farewell  of  all  that  was 
niortal  of  the  mother  who  bore  him. 


\;L1.— I)KI?ORTEI)    BY    XKillT. 

From  the  first  application  of  the  Conscript  law  to  the  middle  of 
1917  a  steady  stream  of  victims  poured  first  into  the  detention  bar- 
racks and  thence  to  t'he  prisons.  The  first  sentence  was  generally  28 
days'  detention,  followed  by  84  days  in  the  civil  prison.  Later  this 
wa.'^  extended  to  111  days,  and  still  later  to  11  months  or  one  year. 
\\heii  it  was  found  that  deportation  would  not  break  the  CO.,  an 
almost  uniform  sentence  of  two  years'  hard  lal)our  was  inflicted.  One 
CO.  tried  by  Court-martial  in  the  early  part  of  1918.  when  asked  to 
plead,  retorted:  "What  is  the  use  of  my  pleading  when  my  sentence 
has  already  been  determined?"  "How  do  you  know  thaf?"  demanded 
the  President  of  the  Court.     "I  know  it,  anyhow,"  replied  the  prisoner. 

21 


ARMAGEDDON   OR   CALVARY. 

"If  you  know  it,  then,  what  is  the  sentence?"  asked  the  President. 
"Why,  two  years,"  said  the  prisoner.  "How  do  you  know?"  again 
asked  the  President.  "We  have  power  to  award  either  a  heavier 
sentence  or  a  lighter  sentence  than  that."  "I  know  you  have  the 
power,"  said  the  prisoner;  "but  in  your  own  mind  you  know  that 
my  sentence  is  two  years."  The  CO.  was  found  guilty  and  remanded 
for  sentence.  When  the  sentence  was  promulgated  it  was  found  that 
he  had  been  correct — his  term  was  two  years'  hard  labour.  Then, 
suddenly.  New  Zealand  was  shocked  into  vigorous  protest  by  the  de- 
portation of  fourteen  Conscientious  Objectors. 

On  July  15,  Mrs.  Ballantyne  received  a  hurriedly-scribbled  note 
front  her  son,  Garth  (who  had  been  sentenced  some  time  previously 
and  was  serving  his  sentence  in  the  civil  prison  at  Mt.  Cook).  He 
had  pencilled  this  note  on  board  ship,  and  it  had  been  got  ashore 
surreptitiously  .  The  message  read:  — 

"The  undermentioned  Conscientious  and  Religious  Objectors 
were  forcibly  put  on  board  the  transport  Waitemata  on  July  13 
and  14:  — 

"JOHN  BAXTER,  ARCHIBALD  McCOLL  LEARMONT  BAX- 
TER, ALEXANDER  BAXTER,  Brighton,  Otago. 

"WILLIAM  LITTLE,  Hikurangi,  Whangarei,  via  Auckland. 

"MARK  BRIGGS,  Box  285,  Palmerston  North. 

"FRED  ADIN,  Patrick  Street,  Foxton. 

"L.  PENWRIGHT,  Geeverton,  Tasmania. 

"HARRY  PATTON,,  North  Beach,  Cobden,  Greymouth. 

"ALBERT  ERNEST  SANDERSON,  Babylon,  North  Wairoa, 
Auckland. 

"GARTH  CARSLEY  BALLANTYNE,  53  Bidwell  Street,  Wel- 
lington. 

"DAVID  ROBERT  GREY,  Lowcliffe,  Hinds,  Canterbury. 

"DANIEL  MAGUIRE,  c/o  P.  Higgins,  Foxton. 

"L.  J.  KIRWAN,  Sewell  Street,  Hokitika. 

"THOMAS     PERCY     HARLAND,     15     Lawson     Street,     Roslyn, 
Dunedin. 
"All  well,  in  good  spirits,  and  determined  to  stick  out  to  the  end." 

Up  to  this  time  the  public  of  New  Zealand  had  had  no  inkling  of 
the  Government's  intention  violently  to  take  from  these  shores  the 
men  who  were  conscientiously  opposed  to  military  service.  The 
parents  and  other  relatives  of  the  fourteen  men  so  taken  were  not 
notified  that  their  sons  were  to  be  taken  away,  and,  consequently,  the 
mothers  particularly  were  shocked  and  almost  prostrated  with  grief 
when  they  learned  that  their  sons  had  been  dragged  away  by  night 
and  forcibly  placed  on  the  transport.  Those  of  us  whose  task  it 
was  ID  break  the  news  to  some  of  the  mothers  would  never  wish  to 
undergo  another  similar  experience. 

22 


DEPORTED   BY   NIGHT. 

On  the  Wednesday  following  the  deportations  the  mother  of  one 
CO.  came  to  me  at  "The  Worker"  office.  She  had  three  sons,  all 
of  whom  were  Conscientious  Objectors.  The  whole  three  had  been 
called  up  under  Section  35,  and  two  of  them  had  gone  to  prison — 
one  for  28  days  and  one  for  84  days,  while  the  third  had  just  given 
himself  up  to  the  military  authorities.  On  the  Tuesday  evening  the 
mother  had  come  to  Wellington  for  the  purpose  of  visiting  her  sons 
on  the  following  day.  On  the  Wednesday  morning,  however,  she 
heard  that  some  Conscientious  Objectors  had  been  forcibly  deported; 
and,  hastening  to  "The  Worker"  office  with  fear  in  her  heart,  she 
learned  that  one  of  her  boys  was  among  them.  She  haii 
received  no  intimation  that  her  son  was  to  be  taken  away,  and  she 
was  given  no  opportunity  whatever  of  seeing  him  before  he  left.  Her 
tears  fell  like  rain,  and  the  sobs  that  welled  from  the  depths  of  her 
broken  mother's  heart  proclaimed  the  magnitude  of  her  hurt.  Search 
all  the  long  history  of  the  ages,  and  you  will  find  nothing  more  tragic 
than  the  spectacle  of  that  bereaved  mother — the  light  gone  out  of  the 
years  of  her  life — bowed  down  beneath  the  burden  of  sorrow  endured 
by  the  mothers  of  the  world  through  all  the  centuries  of  sin  and 
suffering  that  stretch  from  the  foot  of  Calvary's  Cross  to  the  gangway 
of  a  Twentieth  Century  Transport.  To  me  it  was  as  if  the  Mother  of 
God  stood  there  uplifting  a  protest  to  Heaven  against  the  crucifixion 
of  Humanity,  and  levelling  an  accusation  against  myself  and  all  the 
rest  of  New  Zealand  for  the  Wrong  we  had  made  possible. 

A  few  days  later  the  father  of  another  of  the  men  came  from  the 
North,  only  to  learn  that  his  son  had  been  forcibly  taken  away.  He 
was  destined  never  to  see  his  boy  again. 

Other  fathers  and  mothers  were  left  to  discover  for  themselves 
that  their  sons  had  been  transported  without  even  the  sorry  consola- 
tion of  bidding  them  farewell. 


\^I1I.— HISTORIC    PROTEST. 

On  the  morning  of  July  15,  Mr.  Montgomerie  Ballantyne  (now  de- 
ceased) came  to  me  in  haste  with  the  news  that  his  brother  and 
thirteen  other  C.O's.  had  been  forcibly  taken  from  New  Zealand  in  the 
Waitemata.  After  a  hurried  consultation,  we  decided  that  the  most 
effective  method  of  letting  the  public  know  the  evil  thing  which  had 
been  done  would  be  by  deputation  ot  protest  to  the  Minister.  Swiftly 
the  messages  were  sent,  and  as  swiftly  came  the  response.  There 
was  no  man  or  woman  of  responsible  position  in  the  Labour  movement 
who  was  not  ready  to  voice  the  intense  indignation  of  organised 
Labour  at  the  injustice  which  had  been  perpetrated.  Indeed,  to  say 
that  the  indignation  was  intense  is  to  put   it  mildly.      Mr.  McCombs, 

23 


ARMAGEDDON   OR    CALVARY. 

M.P.,  happened  to  be  in  Wellington,  and  to  him  was  entrusted  the  task 
of  arranging  the  deputation,  which  was  received  by  Sir  James  Allen 
(Minister  of  Defence)   on  Tuesday  morning,  July  17. 

The  report  which  follows  was  taken  for  and  appeared  in  "The 
Worker." 

The  deputation  included  Mrs.  R.  W.  S.  Ballantyne  (mother  of  one 
of  the  lads  deported),  Mrs.  S.  Snow  (secretary  Housewives'  Union), 
Mrs.  S.  Beck  (president  Wellington  S.D.P.),  Mrs.  Aitken,  and  Mrs. 
Wesley  (Women's  International  League),  Messrs.  J.  McCombs,  M.P., 
J.  Read  (president  Wellington  Trades  and  Labour  Council),  G.  L. 
Glover  and  J.  Roberts  (president  and  secretary  respectively 
Waterside  Workers'  Federation),  C.  Grayndler  (general  secretary 
A.P.U.),  H.  Tunnicliffe  (Palmerston  North  L.R.C),  H.  E.  Holland  (ex- 
ecutive member  New  Zealand  Labour  Party),  R.  W.  S.  Ballantyne,  W. 
Barr,  and  other  representative  men  and  women. 

Mr.  McCombs,  in  introducing  the  deputation,  said  that  while  it  was 
large  and  representative,  the  men  and  women  comprising  it  had  been 
called  together  at  urgent  notice,  and,  had  time  permitted,  many  others 
who  were  opposed  to  the  forcible  deportation  of  Conscientious  Objec- 
tors would  have  been  there  also.  He  knew  the  deputation  would 
have  the  sympathy  of  the  Minister,  for  he  remembered  that  when  the 
Conscription  Bill  was  before  Parliament,  Sir  James  had  endeavoured 
to  make  the  law  better  than  it  was  for  the  conscientious  objector. 
Within  the  short  period  that  had  elapsed  since  the  deportations  were 
known,  a  number  of  people  had  expressed  their  indignation  to  him 
personally,  and  that  feeling  was  widespread.  He  read  two  extracts 
from  the  "Christian  Commonwealth"  showing  that  some  time  back  the 
British  Government  had  sent  34  conscientious  objectors  over  to 
Franco,  and  when  they  still  persisted  in  refusing  military  service,  had 
court-martialled  them,  and  sentenced  them  to  death;  but  the  death 
sentence  was  immediately  commuted,  and  the  men  returned  to  Eng- 
land and  put  in  prison.  The  British  Government  did  not  now  send 
conscientious  objectors  to  the  trenches;  and  the  deputation  sought  in- 
formation concerning  the  objectors  taken  from  New  Zealand. 

Mr.  J.  Read  said  he  was  firmly  convinced  that  no  military  pur- 
pose would  come  out  of  the  act  of  the  Government  in  shipping  these 
nun  away  against  their  will.  These  men  objected  to  fighting,  and 
surely  the  Government  was  not  sending  them  away  with  the  inten- 
tion that  they  should  be  shot  in  the  trenches  without  lifting  an  arm 
in  (](f(  nee.  If  the  Government  were  not  contemplating  this,  then  the 
men  wctiild  become  a  burden  on  the  military  authorities.  He  raised 
his   voice  against  the  action. 

Mrs.  Tiallantyne  said  she  was  the  only  mother  present  of  the  boys 
who  had  tiecn  forced  upon  a  transport,  and  she  demanded  from  Sir 
James  Allen  the  information  where  her  boy  was  being  sent  to.  She 
bad  se(n  hirn  last  Sunday  week,  and  he  had  told  her  there  was  then 

24 


HISTORIC    1»R()TEST 

no  fear  that  he  would  be  forcibly  put  on  a  transport.  She  was  given 
no  opportunity  of  seeing  him  again  after  he  had  been  shipped.  Her 
son  had  repeatedly  told  her  on  no  condition  would  he  take  part  in 
military  service.  She  was  sorry  for  the  other  mothers  who  had 
been  debarred  from  seeing  their  sons  before  they  were  hurried  away. 
Her  boy  was  only  21  years  of  age,  and  was  in  delicate  health.  He 
had  had  a  college  education,  and  was  a  good,  steady  boy,  and  yet  he 
had  been  put  in  jail  alongside  of  men  who  were  serving  long  sentences 
for  crime.  It  was  shameful  to  think  of,  and  it  was  an  outrage  that 
the  boys  should  be  taken  away  by  force  without  their  mothers  even 
knowing  that  they  were  going. 

Mrs.  Wesley  spoke  for  those  mothers  who  had  not  the  opportunity 
of  seeing  their  sons  before  they  were  deported.  She  herself  had  three 
sons  at  the  front.  They  had  gone  voluntarily,  but  not  with  her  con- 
sent; but  she  felt  sure  they  would  never  have  gone  had  they  known 
that  later  men's  liberties  would  be  taken  from  them  because  they  had 
religious  and  Socialist  objections  to  military  service.  They  left  these 
shores  thinking  they  were  going  to  fight  for  freedom,  and  what  free- 
dom had  they  left  behind?  Since  her  boys  had  gone  freedom  in  New 
Zealand  had  ceased  to  be.  She  was  confident  the  lads  carried  away 
from  New  Zealand  would  never  surrender  their  principles. 

Mr.  J.  Roberts  said  he  spoke  for  the  industrial  workers,  and  he 
asserted  that  from  one  end  of  the  country  to  the  other  industrial 
workers  were  opposed  to  men  being  taken  12,000  miles  away  against 
their  vsiils  for  military  purposes.  The  Government  was  putting  itself 
up  against  a  serious  problem;  it  seemed  to  be  forcing  a  crisis,  for 
when  other  industrialists  saw  their  comrades  put  on  board  a  transport 
at  the  point  of  the  bayonet  it  was  likely  to  engender  trouble. 

A  voice:   "It's  Prussianism." 

.Mr.  Roberts,  continuing,  said  the  Government  would  be  well  ad- 
vised to  bring  these  men  hack,  for  the  pride  of  conscience  was  the 
i;reatest  jiift  niau  possessed.  If  he  were  one  of  the  men  he  would 
keep  on  objecting  all  the  time.  People  might  call  them  shirkers,  but 
he  knew  one  or  two  of  them  who  had  told  him  they  had  decided  thej'^ 
would  not  fight  under  any  con.sideration,  as  they  were  oi)posed  to 
military  service.  It  might  mean  death  for  them,  and  tiius  they  could 
not  be  called  cowards.  Me  thought  the  Government  should  act  im- 
mediately, and  have  these  men  returned  to  New  Zealand. 

■Mr.  Holland  said  he  represented  the  political  side  of  ihc  Labour 
inovenunt.  The  first  question  he  desired  to  ask  the  Minister  on 
l)k'half  of  lK)th  the  niovcnicnt  and  the  relatives  of  thesr  conscientious 
objectors  was:  How  many  men  were  placed  on  board  the  transports, 
and  what  were  their  names'.'  He  asked  for  definite  information  on 
this  matter.  The  deputation  knew  that  some  men  had  been  forcibly 
placed  on  two  transports-  one  lot  on  a  certain  date  (named),  and  they 
had  heard  that  another  lot  had  been  taken  on  a  subsequent  date;  and 
they   also   desired   to   kiuiw    what    was   going    to    he   done    when    these 


ARMAGEDDON   OR   CALVARY. 

\  men  reached  England.  He  was  personally  acquainted  with  most  of 
the  men  who  had  been  subjected  to  compulsory  transportation.  These 
men  had  repeatedly  stated  that  they  were  opposed  to  military  ser- 
vice, and  no  matter  what  the  consequences  were,  he  was  certain  they 
would  never  do  violence  to  their  consciences.  It  seemed  to  him  that 
men  and  women  in  New  Zealand  had  no  legal  right  to  a  conscience. 
He  asked  were  these  men,  who  had  conscientious  objections,  going  to 
be  forced  into  the  trenches.  If  so,  it  was  certain  they  would  be  shot 
rather  than  bear  arms.  What  military  purpose  was  to  be  served, 
he  asked,  by  dragging  this  handful  of  men  away  from  New  Zealand. 
Already  they  had  in  England  more  conscientious  objectors  than  they 
knew  what  to  do  with.  In  Dartmoor  there  were  3000  objectors,  and 
over  600  in  Wormwood  Scrubs,  while  in  all  there  must  be  quite  5000 
of  them  in  Britain.  As  far  as  he  knew,  there  were  more  soldiers 
looking  after  these  men  than  there  were  conscientious  objectors,  so 
that  the  pursuit  of  the  conscientious  objectors  was  not  to  be  com- 
mended even  from  a  military  viewpoint.  The  men  forcibly  deported 
were  of  irreproachable  character,  and  it  could  not  be  charged  against 
them  that  they  were  cowards;  for  it  required  far  more  courage  to  take 
the  stand  they  were  taking  than  to  go  into  camp.  Some  of  these  men 
and  boys  were  Socialist  objectors,  some  were  religious  objectors,  and 
some  objected  for  other  reasons.  The  Minister  would  know  that  dur- 
ing the  first  three  centuries  of  the  Christian  era  no  Christian  would 
be  a  soldier,  and  men — and  women,  too — endured  appalling  tortures 
and  were  flung  to  the  lions  and  heroically  faced  death  rather  than 
surrender  their  principles.  There  was  very  little  applied  Christianity 
to-day;  if  the  Churches  were  all  Christian  churches  they  would  all 
stand  for  peace  and  against  war.  The  spirit  that  actuated  the  con- 
scientious objectors  of  to-day  was  the  spirit  that  inspired  the  early 
Christians,  and  it  was  not  good  that  the  spirit  of  Diocletian  should 
be  let  loose  against  them.  Most  of  those  forcibly  placed  on  the  trans- 
ports were  mere  boys,  and  to  drag  them  from  prison  was  bad  enough, 
to  forcibly  carry  them  on  board  and  make  them  a  public  spectacle 
was  bad  enough,  but  it  was  the  acme  of  inhumanity  and  cruelty  to 
take  them  secretly  from  these  shores  and  not  allow  their  mothers  to 
see  them  or  even  know  they  were  going.  After  referring  to  the 
Socialist  conscientious  objectors,  Mr.  Holland  drew  the  Minister's  at- 
tention to  the  case  of  the  Cody  brothers — of  whom  there  were  five, 
and  who  had  all  been  called  up  under  section  35,  and  who  were 
apparently  pursued  by  a  number  of  persons,  some  of  whom  were 
undoubtedly  actuated  by  a  desire  to  secure  the  land  the  Codys  held 
rather  than  by  motives  of  genuine  patriotism. 

Sir  James  Allen:  "That  statement  is  not  true.  I  utterly  repu- 
diate it." 

Mr.  Holland  said  the  march  of  events  would  show  he  was  right. 
He  prof ledcd  to  refer  to  the  fact  that  three  of  the  Codys  had  been 
ordered   into  camp,  and   when   they   refused  the   remaining  two  were 

26 


HISTORIC   PROTEST. 

again  called  before  the  Board,  and  ordered  into  camp,  leaving  no  one 
to  look  after  the  farms,  and  their  father  lying  on  a  dying  bed.  The 
last  two  brothers  had  since  been  arrested,  and  were  now  in  custody, 
while  the  other  three  had  disappeared. 

Sir  James:  "Do  you  know  where  they  ^re?" 

Mr.  Holland:  "I  do  not;  but  if  I  did,  I  most  certainly  should  not 
tell  you.     I  am  not  an  informer." 

Sir  James:  "I  did  not  think  you  would  give  the  information." 

Mr.  Holland  went  on  to  say  that  it  was  a  fact  that  men  of  Irish 
blood,  with  a  knowledge  of  Irish  history,  were  conscientiously  opposed 
to  taking  part  in  the  war. 

Sir  James:  "God  bless  my  soul!  Irishmen  have  been  some  of  the 
best  soldiers  of  this  war.    They  have  enlisted  in  large  numbers." 

Mr.  Holland:  "I  concede  all  that,  but — " 

Sir  James:  "Give  me  an  Irish  battalion  behind  me,  and  I  would  go 
anywhere!" 

Mr.  Holland:  "Quite  so.  I  admit  the  Irish  can  fight.  They  proved 
it  last  year,  when  3000  of  them,  badly  armed,  held  Dublin  against  30,000 
trained  and  fully-equipped  British  soldiers."  There  was,  however, 
an  historical  fact  which  neither  Sir  James  nor  any  member  of  the 
Cabinet  could  deny,  and  that  was  that  the  Irish  were  subjects  bf 
Britain  by  compulsion  and  not  by  consent,  and  when  they  objected  to 
military  service  it  was  for  this  historical  reason.  When  Irishmen 
volunteered  for  military  service  no  injustice  was  done  to  anybody;  but 
he  submitted  the  Government  ought  not  to  compel  Irishmen  (or  any 
others,  for  that  matter)  to  go  to  the  trenches  from  New  Zealand.  He 
had  seen  it  in  print  that  there  were  now  150,000  British  soldiers  on 
duty  in  Ireland,  and  even  if  they  dragnetted  New  Zealand  to  the  last 
man — First  Division  and  Second  Division — they  could  not  get  that 
number  of  soldiers  from  here.  He  went  on  to  say  that  even  if  he 
were  a  militarist — which  he  was  not,  and  had  never  been — he  would 
not  dream  of  taking  up  the  attitude  taken  up  by  those  responsible  for 
sending  the  conscientious  objectors  away.  They  seemed  to  forget  that 
the  soldiers  now  being  sent  away  were  conscripts  and  not  voluntary 
soldiers,  and  that  there  was  widespread  dissatisfaction  with  the  Con- 
script Law.  He  did  not  think  Cabinet  would  dare  to  test  the  accuracy 
of  that  statement  by  permitting  both  the  soldiers  and  the  people  to 
vote  on  the  question  of  Conscription. 

Sir  James  Allen  said  he  utterly  repudiated  the  susgestion  that  the 
conscripts  were  not  willing  soldiers. 

Mr.  Holland  asked  Sir  James  if  he  would  be  willing  to  test  his' 
opinion  by  taking  a  vote  of  the  men  in  any  of  the  camps  on  the  ques- 
tion of  Conscription.  He  thought  there  was  a  tendency  here  to  copy 
.some  of  the  worst  features  of  Prussian  Militarism,  and  urged  that 
the  boys  just  taken  away  ought  not  to  be  taken  to  the  trenches,  where 
they  would  be  certain  to  refuse  to  bear  arms,  and  would  consequently 
be  liable  to  be  shot.       He  wanted  to  know  whether  the  Government 


ARMAGEDDON    OR    CALVARY. 

proposed  carrying  their  policy  of  deportation  to  its  logical  conclu- 
sion. Would  the  married  men  of  the  Second  Division  who  were  con- 
scientious objectors  be  forcibly  taken  away  also?  He  reminded  Sir 
James  that  the  National  Register  cards  showed  that  some  34,000  men 
of  military  age  said:  "No  military  service  whatever,"  and  nearly 
80,000  said:   "No  military  service  outside  of  New  Zealand." 

Sir  James  Allen:  "Some  of  the  men  who  said  that  were  over  mili- 
tary age." 

Mr.  McCombs  and  Mr.  Holland  said  that  was  not  so;  men  over 
military  age  did  not  have  to  reply  as  to  military  service. 

Mr.  Holland  said  since  then  a  further  change  had  taken  place,  and 
many  married  men  who  had  answered  "Yes"  because  they  believed 
they  would  never  be  called  upon,  were  now  of  quite  a  different 
opinion. 

Concluding,  Mr.  Holland  said,  on  behalf  of  the  mothers  and  relatives 
af  the  men,  he  again  asked  the  Minister  for  information  as  to  the 
number  of  men  transported  and  where  they  were  being  sent.  He 
made  a  plea  that  the  Minister  would  take  such  steps  as  would  prevent 
such  an  outrage  ever  again  being  inflicted  upon  men  and  boys  whose 
crime  was  that  their  ideals  were  loftier  than  those  of  their  fellow- 
men. 

Sir  James  Allen,  in  reply,  said  he  realised  what  a  very  difl!icult 
problem  the  case  of  the  conscientious  objector  to  military  service  con- 
stituted. As  Mr.  McCombs  had  said,  when  the  Bill  was  before  Par- 
liament he  had  done  his  best  to  put  in  a  clause  giving  some  recogni- 
tion to  the  conscientious  objector,  but  Parliament  was  very  decided 
about  it:  and  it  had  been  very  difficult  to  secure  what  they  had 
.erained.  and  that  was  only  secured  after  several  conferences  with  the 
Legislative  Council.  What  was  in  the  Act  was  there  was  the  will  of 
the  majority  in  Parliament,  and  in  administering  it  he  had  to  carry 
out  the  will  of  Parliament.     Now,  as  to  religious  objectors^ 

Mrs.  Ballantyne:  "There  are  Socialist  objectors  as  well  as 
religious." 

Sir  James  Allen  said  there  was  a  clause  in  the  Act  which  pro- 
vided that  if  a  man  objected  to  all  military  service,  he  could  be  put, 
by  applying,  to  work  on  State  farms. 

Mr.  Holland:  "The  present  clause  does  not  meet  the  case  of  either 
the  Catholic  or  the  Church  of  England  conscientious  objector." 

."^ir  James  Allen:  "I  admit  it  does  not  allow  for  all  religious  ob- 
jectors." 

Mr.   Read:   "It  applie.s  only  to  certain  sects." 

!-^ir  James  Allen  .said  that  if  a  man  belon.sred  to  a  religious  denomi- 
nation whose  tenets  were  a.sainst  military  service  he  was  permitted 
\mdcr  Th(    Act  to  do  non-combatant  .service." 

.Mr.  Holland:  Which,  as  the  conscientious  objector  interprets  it, 
meaiis  h(  li)ini;  some  one  else  to  do  the  killing." 

Sir  Janus   .\llcn:    "It  means  savin.t:  life,  not  taking  it."       Continu- 


PITSTORIC   PROTEST. 

ing,  Sir  James  said  he  could  not  understand  the  man  who  would  object 
to  non-combatant  service.  He  had  strained  the  military  law  as  much 
as  possible.  The  authorities  had  to  be  careful  that  they  were  not 
sheltering  shirkers  under  the  conscientious  objectors'  clause — men 
who  had  suddenly  developed  a  conscience. 

Mr.  Holland:  "You  cannot  lay  that  charge  against  these  men;  they 
have  been  conscientious  objectors  all  along." 

Sir  James  went  on  to  deal  with  the  case  of  the  Cody  brothers, 
and  said  the  country  was  at  war  and  in  danger.  There  were  five  bro- 
thers in  this  family,  well-to-do  people.  Other  people  in  the  district 
had  sent  their  sons  to  the  firing  line.  The  five  brothers  were  called  up 
under  section  35  of  the  Act.  Their  cases  were  heard;  three  of  them 
were  ordered  into  camp,  and  the  Board  depended  on  them  to  report  on 
the  date  fixed.     Instead  of  doing  so,  they  had  disappeared. 

Mr.  Holland:  "They  made  it  clear  they  would  not  go  into  camp." 

Sir  James  Allen  said  these  men  were  being  searched  for  by  the 
police,  and  he  could  well  understand  the  indignation  of  the  people  of 
the  district  whose  sons  had  enlisted.  He  denied  that  any  of  the  per- 
sons responsible  for  the  agitation  against  the  Codys  were  influenced 
by  motives  suggested  by  Mr.  Holland. 

A  lady  member:  "The  Codys  are  not  the  only  Irishmen  who  have 
conscientious  objections." 

Sir  James  Allen:  "The  three  brothers  I  have  referred  to  are  de- 
serters, and  when  they  failed  to  report,  the  remaining  twc  were  or- 
dered into  camp." 

Mr.  Holland:  "In  other  words,  you  punished  the  last  two  for  the 
sins  of  the  three  who  failed  to  appear." 

Sir  James:   "Nothing  of  the  sort.     We  punished  no  one." 

Coming  back  to  the  case  of  the  deported  objectors,.  Sir  James  said 
that  these  men  had  been  sent  to  England  for  the  purpose  of  giving 
them  a  further  chance  of  doing  their  duty.  It  was  hoped  that  dif- 
ferent circumstances  would  induce  them  to  change  their  mind.s. 

Mr.  Holland:  "You  want  tlicm  to  go  back  on  their  life-long 
principles." 

A  member:    "Trying   the  third  degrie  on  them?" 

Sir  James  said  the  idea  was  to  ijive  them  another  chance  to  accept 
non-combatant  service. 

Mr.  Holland:  "Have  these  hoys  been  .sent  away  under  any  arrange- 
ment with  the  Imperial  authorities?" 

Sir  James  Allen:  "No.  We  have  not  communicated  with  the  Im- 
perial authorities  at  all  about  the  matter." 

Mr.  Holland:  "Then  I'm  inclined  to  think  you'll  hear  about  it  from 
the  Homo  Oovcrnnunt.  The  authorities  there  have  quite  enough  con- 
scientious ()l)jectors  of  tlicir  own,  and  they're  not  likely  to  take  kindly 
to  your  attempt   to  unload  youi-  troubles  on  to  them." 

Sir  James  s:u(i  .Mr.  Holland  had  questioned  the  willingness  of  the 
nun   wlin   wvvv  heinu   ballotted.      Thai   statement   was  quite  incorrect. 


ARMAGEDDON   OR    CALVARY. 

The  men  who  were  now  being  sent  were  quite  as  willing  as  those 
who  had  volunteered.  When  they  got  into  camp  they  were  as  keen  on 
their  duty  as  the  other  men.  It.  was  true,  as  Mr.  Holland  had  said, 
that  the  men  now  going  away  were  more  subdued,  but  that  was 
because  they  recognised  the  responsibility  that  was  on  them. 

Mrs.  Snow:  "They  are  getting  less  training." 

Sir  James  Allen  denied  that  statement,  and  said  that  men  sent 
away  before  their  time  had  their  training  finished  in  England.  He 
added  that  instructions  had  been  given  in  the  camp  that  genuine  con- 
scientious objectors  would  be  given  non-combatant  work. 

Mrs.  Ballantyne  asked  for  an  assurance  that  the  lads  would  not  e 
subjected  to  persecution  during  the  voyage  to  England. 

Sir  James  Allen  replied  that  they  would  be  subjected  to  no  perse- 
cution whatever. 

Mr.  Roberts  said  he  had  gone  through  the  Military  Service  Act, 
and  he  could  see  nothing  that  gave  the  Government  power  to  deport 
men  who  were  not  soldiers,  men  who  had  not  taken  the  oath. 

Sir  James  Allen  said  these  men  were  New  Zealand  soldiers  under 
the  Act,  notwithstanding  that  they  had  not  taken  the  oath. 

Mr.  Holland  asked  Sir  James  Allen  for  a  definite  statement  of  what 
the  Government  intended  to  do  with  these  lads.  Would  it  compel 
them  to  go  into  the  trenches  in  France,  and  if  they  refused  to  bear 
arms  there  would  they  be  shot?  Would  Sir  James  give  the  deputation 
an  assurance  that  under  no  circumstances  would  these  lads  be  shot  for 
their  refusal  to  surrender  their  principles? 

Sir  James:  "If  I  gave  you  that  assurance,  you  would  communicate 
with  them  and  urge  them  to  hold  out." 

Mr.  Holland:  "There  is  no  danger  of  that.  You  know  your  Gov- 
ernment opens  every  letter  I  receive  or  send.  I  want  the  information 
for  the  sake  of  the  mothers  of  these  lads.  If  the  boys  are  to  be  shot 
because  of  their  principles,  why  not  keep  them  in  New  Zealand  and 
shoot  them  here  instead  of  taking  them  to  France?" 

Sir  James  said  the  Government  had  no  desire  to  shoot  anybody, 
nor  did  they  wish  to  deal  unjustly  with  anyone.  As  he  had  said,  the 
idea  of  sending  the  men  to  England  was  to  give  them  another  oppor- 
tunity to  accept  non-combatant  service.  If  they  still  refused,  he  sup- 
posed they  would  be  dealt  with  in  the  same  way  as  the  other  conscien- 
tious objectors  in  England. 

In  reply  to  Mrs.  Ballantyne,  Sir  James  said  facilities  would  be 
provided  for  parents  to  communicate  with  their  sons. 

In  reply  to  Mr.  Holland,  Sir  James  said  he  could  not  see  his  way 
to  furnish  a  list  of  the  men  sent  away,  but  would  see  that  the  rela- 
tives of  every  man  sent  away  was  communicated  with.  He  had  been 
surprisfd  to  learn  from  the  deputation  that  the  parents  had  not  been 
notified  that  their  sons  were  being  sent  away. 

In  reply  to  further  questions,  the  Minister  said  they  had  less  than 
50  conscientious  objectors  in  custody. 

30 


HISTORIC   PROTEST. 

Mr.  Holland:  "But  you  have  nearly  2000  of  them  already  gazetted 
as  deserters,  and  I  suppose  there  are  2000  or  3000  more  who  are  not  yet 
gazetted?" 

Mr.  McCombs,  on  behalf  of  the  deputation,  thanked  Sir  James  Allen, 
and  the  deputation  withdrew. 


IX.— AFTER   THE   DEPORTATIONS. 

For  a  long  period  after  the  Waitemata  had  sailed,  only  the  merest 
scraps  of  information  concerning  the  "shanghaied"  men  filtered 
through.  It  was  a  time  of  terrible  anxiety  and  suspense  for  the 
mothers  and  other  relatives.  Then  letters  began  to  come  through, 
most  of  them  from  soldiers,  and  many  of  them  sent  surreptitiously, 
and  from  these  we  began  to  learn  in  shreds  and  patches  of  how  the 
deported  men  were  faring.  Garth  Ballantyne  wrote  his  mother  when 
nearing  Capetown,  and  this  letter  brought  the  first  definite  news  of 
experiences  of  the  C.O's.  up  to  that  stage.  Later  still  came  messages 
from  Britain,  telling  of  the  almost  unbeiievable  cruelties  to  which 
they  had  been  subjected  while  on  the  way  from  Capetown  to  Ply- 
mouth and  the  equally  abominable  cruelties  inflicted  on  them  while 
in  Sling  Camp. 

We  learned  that  our  Religious  and  Socialist  friends  in  Britain  (who 
wished  to  advise  the  New  Zealand  C.O's.  as  to  their  legal  position  an.l 
rights  under  English  law),  had  been  refused  permission  to  see  them, 
and  had  been  told  that  "New  Zealanders  in  England  are  under  active 
service  conditions,  and  are  subject  to  military  law."  Which  meant  that 
the  New  Zealand  military  authorities  were  adopting  a  different  atti- 
tude towards  the  C.O's.  from  New  Zealand  than  the  British  military 
authorities  were  adopting  towards  British  Objectors.  Several  depu- 
tations waited  upon  the  High  Commissioner,  at  which  Brigadier- 
General  Richardson  was  present;  and  the  reports  seem  to  indicate 
that  the  High  Commissioner  was  not  permitted  to  have  much  voice 
in  the  matter.  "General  Richardson  refused  point  blank  to  allow  any 
communication  with  the  Objectors  by  representatives  of  sympathetic 
organisations  in  Great  Britain."  The  civil  authority  was  made  to 
subserve  the  military  authority,  and  all  the  time  our  New  Zealand 
militarists  were  gibing  at  the  ultra-militarism  of  Germany.  Of  course, 
it  is  fair  to  assume  that  General  Richardson  had  his  instructions. 

In  the  meantime,  the  feeling  of  resentment  against  the  action  of 
the  Government  in  connection  with  the  deportations  was  gathering 
strength.  Immediately  following  the  deportations,  huge  meetings 
were  held  in  Wellington  and  other  centres,  and  in  nearly  every  case 
practically  unanimous  protests  were  recorded  and  demands  made  for 
the  return  of  the  deported  men.     The  Trade  Unions  carried  innumer- 


ARMAGEDDON    OK    CALVARY. 

able  resolutions,  the  Labour  Party  branches  and  Socialist  organisa- 
tions took  a  similar  course,  the  Women's  Leagues,  Councils,  and 
Institutes  poured  in  their  protests.     The  CO.  became  a  topical  subjec. 

The  Prime  Minister  threatened  that  every  man  not  exempted  by 
the  Boards  would  be  sent  away.  But,  in  spite  of  this  attitude  on 
the  part  of  Mr.  Massey,  there  was  a  general  idea  abroad  that  the 
National  Government  had  received  a  severe  reprimand  from  the 
Imperial  Government  for  its  trouble  in  deporting  the  fourteen.  On 
November  21,  1917,  it  was  stated  by  the  Wellington  "Dominion" — the 
principal  Government  organ— that  "the  Imperial  authorities  have  no 
wish  to  be  troubled  with  men  who  will  not  fight,"  and  that  the  policy 
of  forcing  objectors  aboard  transports  had  "now  been  abandoned  in 
favour  of  imprisonment."  This  statement  strengthened  the  belief 
that  the  Government  had  been  rapped  over  the  knuckles.  It  must 
have  been  felt,  however,  that  the  "Dominion"  had  been  guilty  of  an 
indiscretion,  for  a  little  later  a  Southern  paper  (in  an  evidently  in- 
spired report)  announced  that  all  the  Conscientious  Objectors  in  jail 
would  "have  to  go  the  same  way  as  the  preliminary  draft."  In  reply 
to  this  announcement,  I  expressed  the  opinion  in  print  that  all  that 
was  best  in  the  industrial  and  political  life  of  New  Zealand  would 
indignantly  repudiate  even  the  suggestion  that  any  such  policy  should 
be  pursued. 

The  February  official  statement  of  Sir  James  Allen  contained  the 
following  paragraph:  "Statements  have  been  made  in  the  press  that 
it  is  not  intended  to  despatch  abroad  any  more  of  the  soldiers  who  have 
been  punished  for  refusing  to  obey  orders.  These  statements  have 
been  made  without  foundation,  and  no  such  decision  had  been  reached." 
The  manner  in  which  this  paragraph  is  worded  suggests  a  heavy 
camouflage.  It  had  never  been  stated  by  anybody  that  "soldiers  who 
had  been  punished  for  refusing  to  obey  orders"  would  not  be  sent 
abroad.  The  statement  was  that  Conscientious  Objectors  who  refused 
to  be  soldiers  would  not  be  sent  abroad;  and  this  proved  to  be  correct. 
Sir  James's  statement  could  be  read  in  two  ways.  However,  th,:; 
Government  did  not  dare  to  send  any  more  C.O's.  away.  If  any  further 
attempt  had  been  made  in  that  direction,  it  is  certain  that  a  very 
serious  situation  would  have  arisen  in  New  Zealand.  Besides,  it  is 
now  clear  that  the  Imperial  authorities  did  not  want  C.O"s.  from  here; 
they  had  quite  enough  of  their  own;  and  it  is  just  possible  that,  when 
some  day  the  correspondence  becomes  available,  it  will  reveal  the 
imasure  of  the  National  Government's  humiliation. 


X.— ^^THE   BEST   PANTOMIME." 

The  political  appointment  of  Mr.  A.  L.  Herdman,  Attorney-General 
rn  the  National  Government,  to  a  Supreme  Court  Judgeship  necessi- 
tated a  by-election  for  Wellington  North,  to  fill  the  vacancy  thus 
created.  This  election  took  place  on  February  28,  1918.  It  was  my 
privilege  to  carry  the  Labour  standard  in  that  memorable  conflict, 
and  I  determined  to  make  the  Government's  treatment  of  the  Con- 
scientious Objectors  a  leading  issue  in  the  campaign.  Accordingly, 
in  the  course  of  my  opening  speech  in  the  Town  Hall  Concert  Chamber, 
Wellington,  on  February  7,  I  made  this  a  part  of  my  indictment  of 
the  Government.  I  went  fully  into  the  circumstances  connected  with 
the  deportation  of  the  fourteen  men,  and  dealt  also  with  the  treatment 
of  men  in  detention  and  prison  in  New  Zealand,  challenging  the  Gov- 
ernment to  set  up  a  Royal  Commission,  not  a  military  tribunal,  to 
investigate  my  charges.  The  hall  was  crowded  to  overflowing,  many 
scores  of  people  having  been  unable  to  gain  admission;  and  it  was 
significant  that  there  was  no  dissentient  voice  raised  -against  my 
denunciation  of  the  Government's  policy.  Among  the  matters  I 
placed  before  the  electors  was  the  following  letter,  written  to  me  by 
a  soldier,  and  dated  Featherston,  February  3:  — 

"Sir, — I  want  to  tell  you  what  happened  to  four  Conscientious  Ob- 
jectors who  arrived  here  (Featherston  Camp  clink)  on  Thursday  last 
-  -three  days  ago.  They  were  not  allowed  very  long  to  get  used  to  their 
new  surroundings  before  they  were  called  out  and  marched  off;  first, 
I  presume,  to  the  doctor  for  medical  inspection,  and  then  to  the  Q.M. 
stores,  where,  I  suppose,  an  attempt  was  made  to  get  them  to  sign  for 
a  uniform.  This,  they  told  us  on  returning,  had  been  refused,  each 
of  the  four  standing  on  his  dignity  as  a  Christian  and  civilian.  One 
of  them  had  refused  to  submit  to  a  medical  examination,  and  force 
was  resorted  to.  Again  they  were  not  left  long  in  peace  before  they 
were  ordered  out  and  marched  off  and  subjected  to  a  preliminary  trial 
for  lefusing  to  obey  a  lawful  command,  etc.,  and  remanded  till  the 
following  morning,  when  they  were  again  duly  marched  off  under 
escort  like  criminals,  and  charged  before  the  officer  commanding.  He 
considerately  gave  them  a  further  remand  for  24  hours  to  enable 
them  to  consider  or  reconsider  their  attitude.  This  was  on  Friday; 
on  Saturday  they  were  again  marched  off  and  the  four  were  tried 
together.  They  were  awarded  168  hours'  detention,  and  marched 
back  to  the  clink.  It  now  seemed  that  the  'head.s'  had  finished  their 
share  towards  administering  the  Military  Service  Act.  Shortly  after 
they  had  been  delivered  to  the  sergeant  of  the  guard,  an  underling  m 
the  shape  of  a  n.c.o.  came  bouncing  right  into  the  clink,  had  them 
brought  before  him,  and  gave  them  what  he  called  his  mind  in  language 
which  must  have  been  extremely  edifying  to  Christian  men.  He  then 
told  them  he  had  finished  with  words,  and  would  try  what  action 
'}  :v:. 


ARMAGEDDON    OR  CALVARY. 

would  do.  He  told  them  he  was  first  going  to  have  them  medically 
examined.  Three  of  the  men  expressed  their  readiness,  and  one  again 
objected  as  a  civilian.  'All  right,'  said  the  soldier;  'we  are  going  to 
do  it  supposing  we  have  to  put  the  handcuffs  on,'  and  off  they  were 
marched.  They  were  examined — one  by  force — and  marched  back. 
And  now,  bow  your  heads  in  shame  everyone,  and  read  what  happened 
in  a  military  camp  in  New  Zealand.  The  n.c.o.  came  in  again,  called 
in  the  sergeant  of  the  guard,  who  had  with  him  four  suits  of  military 
denims  or  overalls.  To  each  man  in  turn  he  offered  a  suit,  and  each 
man  in  turn  refused.  The  n.c.o.  then  took  out  his  watch  and  gave 
them  ten  minutes  to  take  off  their  civilian  clothes  and  don  the  denims 
or  have  it  done  by  force.  Needless  to  say,  no  notice  was  taken  either 
of  the  demins  or  the  threat,  but  back  the  n.c.o.  came.  'The  ten 
minutes  are  up,"  he  said;  'now  we'll  try  action.'  He  then  ordered 
each  man  into  a  close  confined  cell,  bolted  the  door  and  locked  the 
bolt — the  cells  are  approximately  8ft.  x  6ft.,  there  is  a  bunk  2ft.  wide 
on  one  side  running  the  8ft.  way,  leaving  a  floor  space  of  8ft.  x  4ft. 
The  n.c.o.  then  had  three  military  police  brought  in,  dlong  with  three 
soldiers,  men  of  the  guard,  and  the  order  was  given  to  open  one  door 

at  a  time  and  'strip  the  b s.'      In  the  first  two  instances,  the  men 

allowed  their  clothes  to  be  torn  off  much  as  a  dead  sheep  allows  its 
skin  to  be  taken;  the  third  man  stood  to  attention  for  the  first  time, 
and  warned  the  attacking  party  that  he  would  resist,  although  he 
said  he  intended  to  hurt  no  one.  The  whole  six  men  were  employed 
to  strip  him,  And  whilst  the  struggle  was  on  the  n.c.o.  stood  outside 

the  door  and  urged  them  on  saying:   'Give  the  b ■  one  up  if  he  is 

such  a  damned  fool,  right  to  the  b jaw,  that'll  stop  him ;  frog- 
march him,  one  of  you  sit  on  his  back  and  another  on  his  head.' 
After  they  had  stripped  him,  the  gallant  n.c.o.  asked  him  how  he  liked 
'action,'  and  the  man's  answer  was,  'I  suppose  you  are  proud  of  your 

day's  work?'      'Yes,'  said  the  n.c.o.;   'it  was  the  best  b pantomime 

I  ever  saw.      There  is  only  one  thing  I'd  enjoy  better,  and  that  is  to 

shoot  you,  you  b ,  with  your  back  to  the  wall.      I'd  do  it  and  feel 

proud.'  His  door  was  then  locked,  and  the  inner  door  dividing  the 
clink  proper  from  the  cells  was  closed  in  our  faces  before  the  fourth 
door  was  opened,  and  our  view  shut  off.  I  called  through  the  closed 
wooden  partition  lo  the  fourth  man,  who  was  a  Religious 
Objector:  'Demand  a  witness,  comrade,'  but  he  didn't  do  so. 
I  heard  him  say  he  would  not  resist,  'but,'  he  said,  'in  the  name  of  the 
I_x)rd  Jesus  Christ,  Who  is  our  Saviour,  I  forbid  you  to  touch  me.'  The 
an.swer  of  the  n.c.o.  to  this  was:  'We  have  taken  vows' as  well  as  you, 
and  we  are  obeying  orders."  Thus  ended  this  glorious  day  of  militar- 
isiii.  Each  man  had  the  suit  of  denims  thrown  into  him  as  his 
civilian  clothes  were  taken  away.  The  men,  with  one  exception,  are 
still  in  their  underpants  and  shirts ;one  of  them — the  one  who  won't 
sign  anythiitti — is  left  without  a  blanket  at  night;  this  man  also  refuses 
to  eat  anything  while  he  is  close  confined.      The  men  are  not  at  all 

34 


''THE    BKST    i^AXTOMIMlv" 

down-hearted;  they  continue  to  sing  their  hymns — all  joining  in.  If 
you  can't  publish  this,  for  God's  sake  do  something.  There  were  four 
other  witnesses." 

The  statements  contained  in  this  letter  are  substantiated  by  an- 
other letter  from  the  "clink"  of  the  same  camp  on  the  same  date,  the 
writer  (the  Religious  Objector  mentioned  by  the  soldier)  being  one  of 
the  founders  of  the  Richmond  Mission.  Extracts  from  this  Religious 
Objector's  letter  were  read  before  the  Defence  Expenditure  Commis- 
sion to  prove  the  useless  expense  of  such  a  system.  On  hearing  the 
extracts  read,  one  of  the  Commissioners  remarked:  "You  will  never 
make  a  soldier  of  that  man." 

The  soldier's  letter  to  myself  is  also  borne  out  by  the  statement  of 
Mr.  J.  K.  W'orrall.  the  CO.  referred  to  as  having  been  forcibly  stripped 
by  six  men. 

The  result  of  the  contest  for  Wellington  North — hitherto  a  Tory 
stronghold — staggered  the  Government.  In  1914  the  votes  cast  for  the 
Tory  and  Liberal  candidates  represented  in  the  aggregate  a  majority 
of  more  than  4700  over  the  votes  cast  for  myself  as  Labour  candidate. 
In  1918  the  combined  Tory-Liberal  majority  was  only  412.  In  the 
three  other  by-elections  which  followed  in  1918 — Grey,  Wellington 
Central  and  Wellington  South— the  Government's  military  policy  and 
its  treatment  of  the  Conscientious  Objectors  was  made  a  fighting  issue, 
and  in  each  case  the  Government  was  decisively  beaten  (with  absolute 
majorities),  notwithstanding  that  the  forces  of  Toryism  and  Liberalism 
in  each  case  combined. 

Immediately  following  my  opf^ning  meeting  in  the  Wellington  North 
campaign,  some  of  my  statements  were  challenged  by  the  Prime 
Minister  in  the  daily  press,  and  the  controversy  recorded  in  the  next 
chapK  r   followed. 


XL-  A    KM':.\rAKM<Ainj':    COXTROVFJ^SV. 

Mr.  .Massey  took  from  the  daily  press  certain  statements  allegevi 
to  have  been  made  by  me,  and  these,  together  with  the  Piiine  .Minister':^ 
replies,  were  printed  as  under:  — 

L  "Fourteen  lads  had  been  sentenced  three  or  four  times  for  the 
one   offence  — a   gross    injustice!" 

Reply:  "This  statement  is  untrue.  No  man  could  l>e  and  no  man 
was   sentenced   more   than   once   for   the   same   offence." 

2.  "Some  of  them  were  hoys  of  tweiitr,  deported  without  their 
mothers  knowing   where  they  were  going." 


ARMAGEDDON   OR    CALVARY. 

Reply:  "This  is  also  untrue.  Seven  were  30  years  of  age  and  over; 
one  was  27;  three  were  24;  one  was  23;  two  were  22." 

3.  "They  were  taken  Home  in  irons." 

Reply:  "This  statement  is  like  the  others,  but  it  is  a  fact  that  on 
the  voyage  some  of  them  would  not  observe  ordinary  cleanliness,  and 
as  a  consequence  their  civilian  outfits  were  condemned  by  the  medical 
officer,  and  they  were  compelled  to  dress  in  uniform." 

4.  "Massey,  Ward,  and  Allen  had  promised  that  they  would  not  be 
persecuted  or  forced  to  wear  uniform." 

Reply:  "No  such  promise  was  made." 

5.  They  were  taken  in  irons  to  France." 

Reply:  "There  were  five  of  these  men  who  stated  that  they  were 
conscientious  and  religious  objectors.  These  latter  were  not  com- 
pelled to  wear  uniform  and  were  not  sent  to  France.  The  report  does 
not  show  how  many  of  the  remainder  were  sent  to  France,  nor  does 
it  say  anything  about  their  being  taken  in  irons,  but  if  such  was  the 
case  then  the  obvious  conclusion  must  be  that  it  was  necessary  for 
the  authorities-  to  take  such  precautions. 

"It  is  quite  clear  that  the  statements  referred  to  were  grossly 
exaggerated,  and  made  for  the  purpose  of  prejudicing  the  administra- 
tion of  the  Military  Service  Act  in  the  eyes  of  the  public.  It  is  no 
pleasure  to  the  Government  or  the  Defence  Authorities  to  punish  men 
for  non-compliance  with  a  necessary  law,  but  in  a  time  of  war  the 
Act  must  be  strictly  enforced  and  administered  without  fear  or  favour." 

My  rejoinder  was  published  as  follows:  — 

"In  the  first  place,  Mr.  Massey  makes  quite  erroneous  quotations 
of  my  statements.  He  could  easily  have  ascertained,  either  from  my- 
self or  the  comprehensive  report  of  my  speech  published  by  '  The 
Maoriland  Worker,'  the  exact  statements  made  by  me.  Instead  of 
doing  this,  he  appears  to  have  based  his  denial  on  the  necessarily, 
condensed  reports  published  in  the  dailies  or  hearsay. 

"I  said:  'Fourteen  lads  .  .  .  had  been  flung  into  prison  here, 
jailed  two  and  three  times  over  for  the  one  offence — a  principle  vile 
in  law,'  etc.  Mr.  Massey  makes  me  say  that  they  were  jailed  'three 
or  four  times'  for  the  one  offence.  He  says  my  statement  is  grossly 
untrue.  Let  the  facts  decide.  The  three  Baxter  brothers  were  each 
sentenced  to  28  days  in  Alexandra  Barracks,  then  to  84  days  in  the 
common  jail,  and  again  to  28  days  in  Alexandra  Barracks,  from  which 
pri.son  they  were  taken  to  the  transport.  .Mr.  W.  Little  received  three 
similar  sentences.  .Mr.  Mark  Briggs  served  a  first  sentence  of  30 
days,  and  was  serving  a  second  sentence  of  84  days  when  deported. 
-Mr.  Garth  f.  Ballantyne  had  served  one  sentence  of  28  days  in  Alex- 
andra Barracks  and  was  serving  a  second  sentence  of  84  days  in  the 
common  jail  when  deported.  There  are  also  Conscientious  Objectors 
serving  second  sentences  in  the  jails  of  New  Zealand  at  the  present 
time. 

36 


A  REMARKABLE  CONTROVERSY. 

"I  was  in  error  to  the  extent  of  one  year  when  I  stated  that  'some 
of  them  were  boys  of  20.'  I  should  have  said  'boys  of  21.'  Mr.  Bal- 
lantyne,  who  was  arrested  on  March  21,  had  attained  his  twenty-first 
year  on  February  16.  Mr.  Fred  Adin  was  a  month  older.  How  Mr. 
Massey  now  makes  them  22  when  arrested  is  for  him  to  explain. 

"Mr.  Massey  is  again  in  error  when  he  credits  me  with  having  said: 
'They  were  taken  Home  in  irons.'  I  spoke  from  very  complete  notes, 
of  which  'The  Worker'  report  is  an  exact  copy.  What  I  said  was: 
'  .  .  .  .  They  were  taken  from  the  jail  in  the  dark  of  night  and 
forcibly  placed  on  a  transport.  When  they  were  taken  out  of  jail 
they  were  not  told  where  they  were  going.  They  were  carried  on  the 
transport  like  bags  of  produce.  And  the  transport  had  left  New 
Zealand  before  their  mothers  knew  what  had  been  done.  Their 
mothers  were  given  no  opportunity  of  saying  good-bye  to  them,  al- 
though they  were  going  to  almost  certain  death.  They  were  herded 
together  in  a  close  prison  cabin,  and  when  they  became  seasick  were 
not  given  vessels  to  vomit  in,  with  the  result  that  the  officer  remarked 
that  the  cabin  'smelt  like  a  hyena's  den.'  Three  of  them  were  left 
at  Capetown,  being  too  ill  to  proceed  further;  and  the  remainder,  along 
with  a  number  of  troops,  were  transferred  to  another  boat — which 
also  carried  passengers.  After  they  left  Capetown  they  were  brought 
on  deck,  and  their  own  clothes  were  stripped  off  them  and  thrown 
overboard— he  had  seen  a  photo  of  the  incident — and  they  were  forcibly 
dressed  in  khaki.  They  took  the  khaki  off,  and  were  at  one  time 
naked  on  deck.  Later  they  were  left  with  only  their  singlets  and 
underpants  on.  On  arrival  in  England  they  were  taken  to  Sling  Camp 
in  irons,  and  were  going  about  there  in  singlets  and  underpants.  They 
were  subjected  to  unthinkable  treatment,  and  later  some  of  them  were 
taken  in  irons  to  France  and  threatened  with  the  death  penalty.' 

"Mr.  Massey  says  that  because  'some  of  them  would  not  observe 
ordinary  cleanliness,  their  civilian  outfits  were  condemned  by  the 
medical  officer,  and  they  were  compelled  to  dress  in  uniform.'  My 
information  is  to  the  effect  that  all  of  them  were  forcibly  dressed  in 
uniform.  A  soldier  writing  from  Sling  Camp  on  October  12  to  a 
friend  at  Invercargill,  says:  'Before  we  left  Wellington  they  put 
about  a  dozen  Conscientious  Objectors  on  board.  There  was  a  great 
go  to  get  them  to  put  on  the  uniform,  but  they  refused.  .  .  .  After 
we  left  the  Cape  it  was  forcibly  put  on  them,  and  their  own  clothes 
were  thrown  overboard.  .  .  .  After  the  uniform  was  put  on  them, 
they  were  brought  round  in  front  of  where  the  lady  pas.'icngers  were — 
it  was  evidently  thought  they  would  not  pull  it  off  there,  but  off  it 
came.'  The  ladies  tied,  according  to  the  writer,  and  the  Conscientious 
Objectors  were  left  naked  on  the  deck. 

".Mr.  Harry  Patton,  in  a  letter  published  in  the  Christchurch 
'Press'  (December  28)  wrote:  'I  was  ordered  to  put  on  the  uniform  on 
the  boat,  refused,  and  was  forcibly  stripped  and  forcibly  dressed  in 
the  uniform,  pulled  it  off,  had  my  clothing  returned  at  night.     Tran- 


ARMAG]i:DDON   OR   CALVARY. 

shipped  to  another  boat  at  Capetown,  kept  at  the  stern  of  the  boat 
a  few  nights,  clothing  taken  off  and  thrown  overboard,  turned  the 
hose-pipe  on  me,  cold  water,  then  dressed  in  the  uniform,  and  num- 
erous other  little  insults  all  the  way.' 

"One  of  the  deported  men,  in  a  letter  written  at  sea  on  October  14 
(and  printed  in  the  'Green  Ray,'  Dunedin)  described  how  they  were 
taken  from  jail  after  dark  on  July  12  last,  and  put  on  board  the  trans- 
port. They  refused  to  embark,  and  were  forcibly  put  on  board.  'I 
myself  was  carried  on  the  shoulder  of  a  military  policeman  as  though 
I  was  a  bag  of  chaff,'  he  wrote.  He  then  describes  how  they  vvera 
placed  in  the  clink  almost  in  the  corner  of  the  boat,  and  for  the  first 
few  days  the  one  porthole  was  not  open,  and  the  door  was  kept 
locked,  consequently  there  was  little  ventilation.  They  were  nearly 
all  seasick,  and,  in  tBe  words  of  the  writer,  'we  could  not  get  any- 
thing to  be  sick  into,  consequently  the  atmosphere  became  almost  in- 
describable: to  use  the  officer's  own  words,  "the  place  smelt  like  a 
hyena's  den."  "  He  then  goes  on  to  say  that  they  were  eventually 
ordered  to  put  on  the  uniform,  and  'on  our  refusing  he  (the  officer) 
brought  in  the  military  police  and  took  us  out  one  by  one  on  to  the 
top  of  one  of  the  hatches,  and  there,  in  front  of  the  crowd  of  laughing, 
jeering  soldiers,  forcibly  stripped  us  and  put  the  uniform  on.  .  .  . 
I  was  greatly  surprised  to  notice  a  number  of  the  officers,  who  are 
generally  supposed  to  be  gentlemen,  apparently  enjoying  this  degrad- 
ing spectacle;  that  also  cameras  were  very  much  in  evidence.  None 
of  us  attempted  to  resist,  but  took  it  all  with  a  quiet  smile,  and  as  soon 
as  we  got  back  to  the  "clink"  immediately  took  off  the  uniform  in 
spite  of  threats  to  tie  us  up  unless  we  kept  it  on.  We  lay  on  our  beds 
all  day  in  our  underclothing,  and  in  the  evening  they  gave  us  back 
our  own  clothes,  which,  of  course,  we  lost  no  time  in  getting  into. 
Kirwan  was  so  ill  when  carried  out  to  have  the  uniform  put  on  that 
he  had  to  be  taken  to  the  hospital,  where  he  has  been  ever  since.' 

"Mr.  Massey  again  misrepresents  me  when  he  states  that  I  said: 
'.Massey,  Ward,  and  Allen  promised  that  they  would  not  be  persecuted 
or  forced  to  wear  uniform.'  In  the  first  place,  Mr.  Massey  knows  quite 
well — as  all  who  have  listened  to  my  addresses  know — that  I  do  not 
descend  to  the  discourtesy  of  dropping  the  prefixes  of  my  opponents. 
What  I  said,  referring  to  the  persecution  of  the  Conscientious  Objec- 
tors, was:  'This  notwithstanding  that  Sir  James  Allen  had  promised  a 
deputation  that  they  would  be  subjected  to  no  persecution.'  Mr. 
Massey  says,  'No  such  promise  was  made.'  I  was  a  member  of  the 
deputation  that  waited  on  Sir  James  Allen  in  July  last,  to  protest 
against  the  deportation,  and  I  have  a  very  clear  recollection  of  Mrs. 
Ballantyne  (mother  of  Mr.  Garth  Ballantyne)  asking  Sir  James  for  an 
assurance  that  the  lads  would  not  be  subjected  to  persecution  during 
the  voyasc  to  England.  The  Minister's  reply  was  that  'they  would  be 
subjected  to  no  persecution  whatever.' 

"In  addition  to  the  way  they  were  treated  on  the  transports,  letters 

38 


A  REMARKABLE   CONTROVERSY. 

from  soldiers  and  others  in  England  show  what  other  treatment  the 
objectors  were  called  upon  to  endure.  The  London  'Call'  of  Thursday, 
November  15,  contained  the  following,  under  the  heading  'Brought  from 
New  Zealand  in  Irons.':  'Further  particulars  are  to  hand  respecting 
the  New  Zealand  Conscientious  Objectors  to  whom  reference  was  made 
recently  in  these  columns.  Of  the  14  that  were  embarked  to  England 
with  the  28th  New  Zealand  Reinforcements,  to  which  they  were  deemed 
to  be  attached,  three  of  them^Sanderson,  of  North  Wairou,  and  two 
Baxter  brothers,  of  Otago — were  put  off  the  ship  at  Capetown,  as  they 
were  too  ill  to  be  taken  further.  The  rest  were  taken  to  Sling  Camp, 
Salisbury,  where  they  remained  in  irons  in  the  guardroom  for  several 
weeks.  Eight  of  them  have  now  been  sent  over  to  France.  Most  of 
them  went  over  handcuffed,  and  therefore  still  resisting.  Their 
names  are:  Ballantyne,  Harland,  Patton,  Little,  Baxter,  Briggs, 
Maguire,  and  Kirwan.  Of  the  other  three,  one  is  in  Codford  Military 
Hospital,  suffering  from  dysentery  (Adin,  of  Foxton),  and  two  are 
still  in  Sling  Camp  (Gray,  of  Canterbury,  and  Penwright,  of  Tas- 
mania).' 

"One  soldier  'mentioned  seeing  one  of  them  forced  to  put  on  a  pack 
for  France.  He  threw  it  off  immediately.  It  was  again  put  on  and 
he  was  handcuffed.  He  then  sat  down,  and  was  kicked  along  at  the 
heels  of  the  draft." 

"On  October  27  Mr.  Patton  wrote  to  his  relatives:  'I  am  being 
taken  over  to  France  to-night  under  arrest.  I  don't  know  what  they 
are  going  to  do  with  me  there,  but  you  will  perhaps  hear  some  day.' 
On  October  26  Mr.  L.  Kirwan  wrote  to  his  relatives  to  the  same  effect. 

"On  November  30,  the  'Friend' — a  British  religious  paper — printed 
a  letter  from  Mr.  Patton,  in  which  he  stated  that  three  of  them 
reached  Etaples  on  October  28.  They  refused  to  parade,  and  were 
taken  before  an  officer,  by  whom  he  was  sent  to  the  guardroom  for  a 
few  days.  His  letter  runs:  'Then  I  was  ordered  out  with  a  pack  on.  I 
refused,  and  the  pack  was  fastened  on  to  me.  I  refused  to  walk  with 
the  pack,  and  was  dragged  about  two  hundred  yards  and  placed  in  a 
tent.  .  .  .  There  is  another  Conscientious  Objector  in  the  guard- 
room, named  Briggs,  who  has  relatives  in  Yorkshire.  Three  other 
Conscientious  Objectors  have  been  sent  up  to  the  firing-line — Little, 
Baxter,  and  Ballantyne.  I  don't  know  what  had  become  of  them.  The 
officer  told  me  I  would  be  sent  on  there,  too,  and  would  probably  he 
shot.' 

"We  now  have  Mr.  Massey  making  the  curious  statement  that  'there 
were  five  of  these  men  who  stated  that  they  were  Conscientious  and 
Religious  Objectors.  These  latter  were  not  compelled  to  wear  uniform, 
and  were  not  sent  to  France.'  Mr.  Massey's  statement  does  not 
square  with  information  in  the  possession  of  myself  and  others.  The 
whole  14  were  Conscientious  Objectors — some  for  religious  reasons, 
some  for  Socialist  reasons,  and  some  for  Irish  reasons.  Three  of 
them  were  left  at  Capetown  ill;   eight  were  sent  to  France;   and  one 

3!> 


ARMAGEDDON   OR   CALVARY. 

was  ill  in  Codford  Hospital;  Adin  and  Gray  were  still  in  Sling  Camp, 
Where  does  Mr.  Massey  get  the  five  who  were  'not  sent  to  France' 
because  they  professed  to  be  Conscientious  Objectors? 

"I  note  with  interest  that,  while  Mr.  Massey  does  not  admit  that 
these  Conscientious  Objectors  were  taken  to  France  in  irons,  he  is 
prepared  to  justify  the  outrage  if  it  really  happened. 

"Mr.  Massey  has  made  no  attempt  to  reply  to  my  exposure  of  the 
treatment  of  Conscientious  Objectors  at  Featherston  only  the  other 
day.  Neither  has  he  deigned  to  explain  why  his  Government  dragged 
the  14  away  by  night  without  giving  their  mothers  any  opportunity 
whatever  of  bidding  them  good-bye. 

"It  is  not  at  all  true  that  my  statements  'were  grossly  exaggerated, 
and  made  for  the  purpose  of  prejudicing  the  administration  of  the 
Military  Service  Act  in  the  eyes  of  the  public'  They  were  made  by 
way  of  an  honest  endeavour  to  save  the  young  men  and  boys  of  this 
country  from  becoming  in  a  general  sense  the  victims  of  such  atroci- 
ties as  characterise  the  conscript  service  of  Prussia  and  other  mili- 
taristic countries,  and  they  were  further  made  in  the  interests  of  the 
broken-hearted  mothers  of  New  Zealand. 

"I  take  this  opportunity  to  challenge  Mr.  Massey  to  set  up  a  Royal 
Commission^ — not  a  military  tribunal — to  investigate  this  matter,  and 
to  permit  the  retoun  of  the  deported  Conscientious  Objectors  for  this 
purpose.  Nothing  that  has  ever  happened  has  wrought  such  evil  to 
our  national  life  as  this  one  incident;  I  venture  to  say  that  It  has 
shocked  the  finer  feelings  of  every  honest-minded  militarist,  to  say 
nothing  of  the  many  thousands  who  think  otherwise. 

"In  conclusion,  in  view  of  the  positive  discrimination  which  has 
characterised  the  administration  of  our  military  law,  is  not  the  Prime 
Minister  rather  straining  the  possibilities  when  he  tells  us  that  'in  a 
time  of  war  the  Act  must  be  strictly  enforced,  and  administered  with- 
out fear  or  favour.'  That  is  a  matter,  however,  that  I  shall  deal  with 
at  my  election  meetings." 

Mr.  Massey  made  a  further  statement,  over  which  the  "Dominion" 
placed  the  headlines:  "A  Tell-tale  Letter. — About  Conscientious  Objec- 
tors.— Plain  Talk  by  Mr.  Massey,"  commenting:  "Mr.  Massey  does  not 
follow  Mr.  Holland  further  in  investigation  of  the  statements  as  to 
how  the  men  were  treated,  but  he  quotes  a  letter  to  show  that  Con- 
scientious Objectors  may  not  always  be  deserving  of  sympathy."  Mr. 
Ma.ssey's    statement    follows:  — 

"There  is  just  one  point  I  wish  the  people  of  this  Dominion  to 
thoroughly  realise  with  respect  to  the  men  for  whom  Mr.  Holland  Is 
endciivouring  to  create  a  f^reat  deal  of  unnecessary  sympathy  as  the 
'victims  of  atrocities  characteristic  of  the  conscript  service  of  Prus- 
sia," clc. 

"1  desire  to  make  it  clear  that  so  far  as  the  statute  law  of  this 
country  is  concerned  these  men  are  not  Conscientious  Objectors,  but 

40 


A  REMARKABLE  CONTROVERSY. 

soldiers  of  the  Expeditionary  Force  who  have  been  called  up  by  ballot 
to  take  their  share  in  the  defence  of  the  country  of  whose  privileges 
and  protection  they  have  taken  full  advantage,  and  that  so  far  as  the 
Defence  Department,  which  has  to  administer  the  law,  is  concerned, 
they  must  obey  orders  just  the  same  as  their  fellow  citizens  do,  and 
be  prepared  to  accept  the  consequences  of  such  refusal.  These  men 
cannot  be  allowed  to  place  themselves  superior  to  the  will  of  Parlia- 
ment and  obey  no  law  but  their  own  inclination.  If  this  is  tolerated 
we  will  soon  see  an  end  of  all  decent  order  and  government  and  a 
state  of  affairs  such  as  is  now  wrecking  unfortunate  Russia. 

"I  want  every  father  and  mother  who  have  sons  fighting  and  dying 
in  defence  of  our  liberties  and  civilisation,  and  'for  the  service  of 
freedom,'  not  to  be  led  away  from  the  real  issue,  which  is,  that  these 
so-called  'religious,  conscientious,  and  Socialistic'  objectors  demand 
the  right  to  accept  and  enjoy  all  the  benefits  accruing  from  the  sacri- 
fices of  the  sons  of  New  Zealand,  but  repudiate  their  obligations  to 
share  in  these  sacrifices. 

"Mr.  Holland  has  made  many  statements  and  quoted  many  letters 
in  the  interests,  as  he  says,  'of  the  broken-hearted  mothers  of  New- 
Zealand.'  I  think  it  is  just  as  well  that  the  parents  of  New  Zealand 
generally  should  be  given  an  opportunity  to  gain  a  clear  conception 
of  the  lofty  principles  and  ideals  which  animate  some  of  these  mar- 
tyrs in  the  cause  of  conscience.  The  following  extracts  are  from  a 
letter  which  was  written  by  the  parent  of  a  'Conscientious  Objector,' 
whose  conscience  only  developed  after  his  appeal  on  all  other  grounds 
had  failed  and  his  claim  for  exemption  had  been  dismissed:- — 

"  'I'm  afraid  all  this  villainy  is  having  a  bad  effect  on  us.  David 
satisfies  me.  May  he  go  down  quick  into  hell,  may  his  flesh  be 
torn  by  dogs,  may  his  name  be  obliterated.  Relax  all  the  law, 
"Thou  Shalt  not  kill,"  and  you'll  find  ten  thousand  dead  within  one 
week.  ...  A  father  of  a  returned  soldier  told  me  this  morning 
that  the  French  so  hate  the  British  and  colonials  that  they  refused 
them  the  use  of  their  wells,  and  at  the  Somme  the  French  women 
preferred  to  go  behind  the  German  lines  to  being  left  to  our  troops. 
An  American  reporter  has  said  that  without*  a  million  American 
troops  we  cannot  break  the  German  line.  Good  job.  too.  Well, 
where  are  we  to  go  after  the  war?  I'm  sick  of  the  Union  Jack. 
For  thirty  years  it  has  been  blood-soaked  without  ces.sation.  We 
Fn.gl'ish  arc  played  out.  There's  no  good  in  us.  Wf  are  a  set  of 
])rutal  thieves.  There's  a  Socialist  colony  in  CaliCornia. 
Our  real  eniMuy  is  alive,  and  none  .seem  to  ino\i'.  .  .  .  Curse 
them,  as  Elijah  did,  and  as  all  did,  cur.sc  tlioiu.  Will  no  one  come 
out?  Will  not  one  revolt?  Curse' them.  Ciiist'  ihem  hard.  They 
oimht  to  die,  for  they  are  not  only  useless,  hui  a  stumbling-block, 
and  by  (lod'.s  laws  they  should  die  a  slavi's  (hath.  .  .  .  Damn 
them,  they  are  rotten.     By  heaven,  the   whole  country  is  rotten — 

•:1 


ARMAGEDDON   OK    CALVARY. 

absolutely  rotten.  .  .  .  I'm  r©gretting  all  the  time  now  that  you 
ever  went  near  this  people.  It  is  my  first  close  experience  of 
"soldier,"  and  I  find  the  great  mistake:  they  are  scum,  not  fair, 
straight  people,  but  criminals  worse  than  jailbirds.  .  .  The  idea  of 
fighting  for  such  filth  makes  one  sick.  ...  I'd  love  to  change 
places  with  you  now.  I'd  take  the  oath,  and,  by  God,  I'd  kill  ail 
I  could  of  these  black-hearted  scum.  Curse  them.  No  Australian 
blacks  are  lower.  .  .  .  Wriggle  out,  if  possible,  and  don't  be 
particular.  Once  you  can  get  away  from  them  you  can  manage 
till  we  can  leave  them  to  the  Japs.  May  the  Japs  mutilate  every 
cursed  man  and  rape  every  woman.  War  they  want— let  them  go 
there — we  don't  want  it.  .  .  .  Curse  them.  God  curse  and  blight 
them.  .  .  .  One  thing  you  may  be  sure  about — if  we  British  get 
a  complete  victory  it  will  be  our  last:  we  shall  be  intoxicated  with 
our  hell-got  gains  and  pride  and  power,  and,  just  as  Rome  gained 
some  tremendous  battles  at  her  downfall,  so  with  us.  ...  . 
I'm  thinking  that  the  war  is  steadily  proving  the  superiority  of  the 
Germans  at  every  point.'  " 

At  the  foot  of  Mr.  Massey's  statement  was  printed  the  following 
Press  Association  message  from  Dunedin:^ — 

"Commenting  on  the  recent  reference  by  Mr.  Holland  concerning 
Conscientious  Objectors,  the  Minister  of  Defence  states  that  the  14 
men  to  whom  Mr.  Holland  referred  could  not  all  be  classed  as  Con- 
scientious Objectors.  Five  had  alleged  conscientious  objections,  which 
the  Boards  rejected,  five  had  appealed  on  the  ground  of  hardship  and 
public  interest,  and  did  not  allege  conscientious  objections,  and  four 
did  not  appeal.  No  promise  was  ever  made  by  Mr.  Massey,  Sir  Joseph 
Ward,  or  Sir  James  Allen  that  the  men  would  not  be  forced  to  wear 
uniforms.  The  real  religious  objector,  when  exempted  by  a  board, 
did  not  wear  a  uniform,  and  did  service  with  the  Agricultural  Depart- 
ment. None  of  these  men  were  entitled  to  this  course,  and  most  of 
them  had  not  attempted  to  prove  themselves  within  the  category.  The 
Defence  Department  knew  as  much  about  these  men  as  it  knew  about 
any  other  soldier  that  was  embarked  and  reached  the  other  end.  It 
was  impossible  to  keep  a  record  of  every  man's  movements." 

To  the  foregoing,  I  replied:  — 

"I  had  hoped  that  the  Prime  .Minister  would  make  some  endeavour 
to  offer  an  explanation  of  the  facts  furnished  by  me  in  my  last  state- 
ment. But  he  has  not  done  so.  It  is  unfortunate  that  Mr.  Massey  is 
compl(  u  ly  .silent  on  the  matter  of  Conscientious  Objectors  being  sub- 
jecltd  to  two  and  three  sentence.s  for  the  one  offence,  although  he  at 
hrst  (]>  nifd  that  more  than  one  sentence  could  be  inflicted.  He  is  also 
ominously  silent  about  the  cruelties  which  were  inflicted  on  the 
Conscit  niioiis  Objectors  on  the  transport  and  in  Sling  Camp.  He  now 
flies  off  at  another  tangent,  and  argues  that  'these  men  are  not  Con- 

42 


A    l{  Ki\!  A  H  K A H f. K   ( '( )NTK( ) V  E J{S Y. 

scientious  Objectors,  but  soldiers  of  the  P^xpeditionary  Force,'  etc. 
I  have  known  some  of  the  men — particularly  Messrs.  Ballantyne  and 
Briggs — for  a  number  of  years,  and  they  are  not  only  Conscientious 
Objectors  themselves,  but  both  of  them  belong  to  families  thai  have 
for  long  years  held  pronounced  views  on  militarism.  Mr.  Massey 
seems  to  think  that  the  possession  of  a  conscientious  principle  is  a 
matter  to  be  determined  by  Act  of  Parliament  or  War  Regulations. 
For  the  first  three  centuries  of  the  Christian  era  the  Christians  ;j;en- 
erally  held  similar  views  to  those  held  by  the  Christian  Conscientious 
Objectors  of  to-day;  and  the  rulers  of  that  period  took  the  same  view 
that  Mr.  Massey  and  his  Government  take  to-day.  Then  the  conscience 
men  (and  women)  were  tlung  to  the  lions  or  nailed  to  the  cross.  Mr. 
Massey  makes  a  law  which  refuses  to  the  Catholic,  the  Anglican,  the 
Presbyterian,  the  Methodist,  the  Salvationist,  or  the  Socialist,  the  right 
to  hold  a  conscientious  objection  to  military  service;  and,  having  made 
his  law,  he  then  pronounces  its  victims  'conscienceless.'  I  can  ap- 
preciate the  difficulty  which  he  must  necessarily  experience  in  get- 
ting the  more   thoughtful   of  his  own   supporters   to  see   it   that   way. 

"But  can  .Mr.  Massey  explain  the  apparent  contradiction  of  two  of 
his  statements.  In  the  first  denial  he  said:  'There  were  five  of  these 
men  who  stated  they  were  Conscientious  and  Religious  01)ject()rs. 
These  latter  were  not  compelled  to  wear  imiform  and  were  not  sent 
to  France.'  1  furnished  facts  in  my  last  statement  which  completely 
disposed  of  this  assertion.  In  his  second  statement,  Mr.  Massey  tells 
us  'tliese  men  are  not  Conscientious  Objectors,'  and  he  terms  them 
'these  so-called  religious,  conscientious,  and  Socialist  objectors.'  Will 
he  then  tell  us  how  it  came  that,  as  he  first  alleged,  five  of  them  were 
treated  as  Conscientious  Ot)jectors  if  none  of  them  were  Conscientious 
Objectors?  Will  he  also  explain  the  discrepancy  between  his  first 
statement,  which  was  clearly  to  the  effect  that  only  some  of  them 
were  compelh  d  to  dress  in  unii'orm  and  for  the  sole  reason  th.u 
iheir  civilian  outfits  were  condemned  by  the  medical  officer  lucaus-;' 
they  'wniiU!  not  ()t)S(>rve  ordinary  cleanliness,'  and  Sir  James  AUen'.s 
statement,  which  is  in  effect  that  'no  promise  was  ever  made 
that  the  men  would  not  be  forced  to  wear  uniforms'-  the  implication 
i)eing,  of  course,  that  it  was  all  along  intended  to  compel  them  to  weai- 
laiiforni.  In  my  speech  no  reference  was  made  to  any  i)roiiiise  about  a 
uniform,  but  only  about  persecution.  However,  it  is  fur  tin  .Ministers 
to    tell    us    whose   statement    is    correct. 

"I  notice  Sir  .lames  Allen  says:  'The  Defence  Uepaniuent  knew  as 
much  about  tliose  men  as  it  knew  about  any  otlier  soldier  that  was 
embarked  and  reached  the  other  end.'  He  adds  that  it  is  impossible 
to  keep  a  record  here  of  every  man's  movements.  If  this  is  so,  it 
is  \V(  igluy  proof  of  the  need  for  great  departmental  changes.  Four- 
teen men  and  boys  with  conscientious  objections  are  forcibly  carried 
from  New  Zealand,  they  are  subjected  to  treatment  Itorn  of  the  sjiirit 
of  Diocletian,  some  of  them  are  taken  in  irons  to  France — one  a  boy 

43 


ARMAGEDDON    OR    CALVARY. 

of  between  21  and  22 — are  forced  to  the  firing  line,  their  mothers  are 
almost  frantic  with  anxiety  and  grief,  and  for  months  the  Department 
tells  them  it  can  give  them  no  information  as  to  the  fate  of  their  boys. 
'■Why  was  it  left  to  some  of  the  mothers  to  learn  from  private 
sources — as  they  have  learnt  this  week — that  their  boys  have  been 
courtmartialled  and  sentenced  to  five  years'  hard  labour?  The  three 
sent  to  the  firing  line  were  Messrs.  Ballantyne,  Little,  and  Baxter — and 
these  are  the  men  who  have  been  sentenced.  Mr.  Ballantyne  is  in  a 
military  prison  in  France,  and  the  others  are  also  in  prison,  either  in 
France  or  England.  I  submit  that  the  Prime  Minister's  sneer  about 
'the  broken-hearted  mothers'  will  not  satisfy  the  men  and  women  of 
New  Zealand,  who,  whatever  their  political  attitude  or  their  views  on 
militarism,  love  justice.  One  of  the  things  they  will  want  to  know  is 
why  these  men  and  boys  are  not  brought  back  to  New  Zealand. 

"It  seems  to  me  that  there  is  no  language  in  which  could  be  ade- 
quately expressed  the  regret  and  resentment  which  every  fair-minded 
person  must  have  felt  on  reading  the  letter  (alleged  to  have  come  from 
th€  parent  of  an  objector)  put  into  print  by  the  Prime  Minister  with 
the  only  possible  object  of  besmirching  the  parents  of  the  14  deported 
objectors.  I  would  urge  that  the  people  have  a  right  to  expect  from 
the  Prime  Minister  a  higher  conception  of  what  he  owes  to  his  office — 
a  higher  regard  for  the  dignity  of  his  position — than  to  permit  the 
anger  of  an  ill-advised  moment  to  induce  him  to  offer  such  a  letter 
without  the  name  of  the  alleged  author.  The  parents  of  such  of  the 
Conscientious  Objectors  as  I  am  personally  acquainted  with  are  as 
highly  respectable  and  as  deeply  respected  by  those  who  know  them, 
as  any  member  of  Mr.  Massey's  Cabinet,  and  would  neither  be  guilty 
of  penning  such  a  letter  as  the  one  referred  to,  nor  of  putting  it  into 
print   if  it  happened  to  -fall  into  their  hands." 


XII.— DEPAKTMENTAJ.    INACCURACIES. 

So  wide  was  the  interest  aroused,  so  great  the  indignation  awak- 
ened, because  of  the  treatment  of  the  C.O.'s  that  towards  the  close 
of  P\'l)ruary,  1!)18 — on  the  eve  of  the  Wellington  North  by-election — 
the  Government  deemed  it  advisable  that  Sir  James  Allen  should 
issue  ail  official  statement  covering  their  cases.  The  document  con- 
sisted of  eight  pages  of  printed  foolscap,  and  purported  to  be  i 
statement  "as  to  Objectors  generally  and  the  fourteen  Objectors  who 
were  embarked  for  service  abroad  in  July,  1917." 

On  I  lie  front  page  of  this  somewhat  involved  and  unfortunately 
i-naccuratc  and  contradictory  document,  the  question  was  asked: 
"What    has   the   Defence  Department    done   which   it   should  not  have 

41 


DEPARTMENTAL    INACCURACIES. 

done?"  and,  still  more  ludicrously,  on  the  same  page  it  was  pro- 
claimed, with  apparent  seriousness:  "If  responsible  authority  is  to 
knuckle  under  to  insubordination  the  whole  fabric  of  the  British 
Empire  would  crumble  into  chaos." 

Readers  should  take  the  trouble  to  secure  copies  of  this  very  re- 
markable document  for  themselves.  It  is  not  possible  in  the  pages 
of  this  book  to  devote  any  large  amount  of  space  to  its  discussion.  I 
purpose  merely  dealing  with  several  of  its  most  prominent  inac- 
curacies, inconsistencies,  and  contradictions. 

One  of  the  first  of  these  has  to  do  with  the  religious  bodies.  Sir 
James  declared  that  "the  only  religious  bodies  which  have  so  far 
satisfied  the  Boards  as  to  their  right  to  exemption  are  the  Christa- 
delphians.  Seventh  Day  Adventists,  and  Quakers."  Still,  as  the 
records  will  show,  quite  a  number  of  Quakers,  and,  I  think,  also 
Seventh  Day  Adventists  and  Christadelphians,  found  the  prison  gates 
slammed  behind  them. 

The  Minister  was  at  much  pains  to  controvert  the  facts  set  forth 
in  Mr,  Garth  Ballantyne's  letter  as  to  the  position  and  ventilation  of 
the  "clink"  on  the  transport,  which  Sir  James  endeavoured  to  show 
was  all  that  could  be  desired.  The  obvious  answer  to  Sir  James  ou 
this  point  is  that  Mr.  Ballantyne  and  the  other  Objectors  were  in  the 
"clink"  and  Sir  James  was  not.  The  men  who  spent  three  week.s 
in  the  place  are  entitled  to  have  their  word  taken  in  preference  to 
that  of  the  politician  who  had  frequently  admitted  that  he  had  neither 
facts  nor  information  concerning  the  Objectors. 

In  his  statement  Sir  James  Allen  declared  that  if  the  Objectors 
were  forcibly  dressed  in  khaki  it  was  because  their  own  clothes  were 
condemned  by  the  medical  officer.  But  the  Minister  neglected  (per- 
haps wisely  so)  to  explain  why,  if  their  clothes  were  so  condemned, 
they  were  permitted  to  have  them  back  after  the  first  forcible  dress- 
ing, and  why  they  were  permitted  to  wear  the  condemned  clothes 
until  Capetown  was  reached. 

Sir  James  quoted  a  report  from  General  Godley,  in  which  the 
General  stated  that  two  Generals  (whose  names  are  for  some  reasoa 
withheld)  desired  that  the  Objectors  should  be  sent  with  drafts  in 
the  usual  way  "and  treated  like  any  other  soldier."  To  this,  however, 
General  Godley  said  he  did  not  consent,  and  it  is  clear  that  his 
reason  for  not  agreeing  was  not  because  of  any  desire  to  respect  the 
conscientious  objection  of  the  men  conserned,  but  because  if  they  were 
sent  with  drafts  "the  inevitable  result  of  it  would  be  that  the'y  would 
either  desert  or  else  refuse  to  go  up  to  the  trenchos  when  ordered, 
and  would  then  be  shot  for  refusing  to  do  duty  in  the  face  of  the 
enemy,"  and  General  Godley  thought  that  this  would  be  the  very  worst 
thing  that  could  happen — it  "would  make  martyrs  of  them." 

In  a  report  of  a  week  later,  if  Sir  James  Allen's  statement  is 
correct.  General  Godley  intimated  that  "all  the  Conscientious  Objec- 
tors   sent    from   New   Zealand,   except    two,    have   agreed    to   do   duty 

45 


ARMAGEDDON    OR   CALVARY. 

either  in  ttie  infantry  or  as  stretcher-bearers."  It  will  be  seen  that 
the  General  makes  no  fine  distinctions,  such  as  Mr.  Massey  and  Sir 
James  Allen  sought  to  draw  at  this  end.  He  recognises  all  .the  four- 
teen as  genuine  Conscientious  Objectors.  He  attributes  "the  conver- 
sion to  a  reasonable  attitude  of  the  majority  of  these  men  -to  the  fact 
that  they  were  separated  and  posted  to  different  companies  and 
units."  It  had  been  recognised  that  strength  is  born  of  association, 
and  that  the  men  could  never  be  broken  down  while  they  were  to- 
gether. But  the  General  is  silent  on  the  dreadful  experiences  the  Ob- 
jectors were  called  upon  to  undergo — experiences  in  which  Sir  James 
Allen  may  at  this  late  hour  be  able  to  discern  "the  process  of  their 
conversion,"  which  he  told  the  Orphan  Club  he  did  not  know. 

In  this  same  report  of  General  Godley's,  after  notifying  that  all 
but  two  had  given  in,  there  is  another  notification  to  the  effect  that, 
"in  addition  to  the  two  Conscientious  Objectors  mentioned,  there  have 
been  three  others  who  have  been  treated  like  any  other  soldier,  and 
have  had  to  be  tried  by  courtmartial  in  France  on  a  charge  of  dis- 
obedience to  an  order,"  that  the  Court  had  found  them  guilty  and 
condemned  them  to  five  years'  penal  servitude,  and  that  he  had  com- 
muted the  sentence  to  two  years'  hard  labour,  with  a  recommendation 
that  this  be  "suspended"  to  three  months  if  their  conduct  in  prison 
was  good.  This  was  another  phase  of  "the  process  of  their  conver- 
sion." 

In  this  latter  part  of  General  Godley's  report  there  was  one  impor- 
tant omission  and  two  most  extraordinary  contradictions.  The  General 
omitted  to  say  that  a  New  Zealander  sentenced  under  the  military  law 
to  more  than  two  years  could  not  have  been  held  in  a  French  military 
prison,  and  would  have  had  to  be  returned  to  New  Zealand  to  serve 
the  sentence.  The  report  that  the  three  men  sentenced  were  treated 
"like  any  other  soldier"  furnishes  a  complete  contradiction  of  the 
General's  icport  of  only  a  week  earlier,  in  which  he  says  he  would 
not  agree  to  the  suggestion  of  the  two  other  Generals  that  the  Objec- 
tors should  be  treated  "like  any  other  soldier."  Yet  another  contra- 
diction is  apparent  when  he  says  first  that  all  the  Objectors  brought 
fiotn  New  Zealand  but  two  have  given  in  and  then  reports  that  three 
others  have  been  sentenced  by  courtmartial  because  they  would  not 
give  in.  In  compiling  his  second  report  the  General  must  surely  have 
foriiotten  all  about  the  earlier  one. 

As  iurther  showing  the  extreme  carel«*Ksness  with  which  the  official 
.'Statement  must  have  been  prepared,  it  may  be  mentioned  that  Sir 
James  Allen's  assertion  that  Mr.  Garth  Ballantyne  was  drawn  in  the 
first  ballot  was  altogether  wrong.  Mr.  Ballantyne  was  drawn  in  the 
second  ballot.  Sir  James  said:  "He  appealed  on  the  grounds  that  his 
calling  up  was  contraary  to  public  interest  because  of  his  occupation 
and  a  hardship  to  his  employers,  a  firm  of  surveyors.  He  was  repre- 
sented by  a  prominent  Wellington  solicitor,  his  case  was  carefully 
fou.iiht  out.  and  the  question  of  religion  or  conscientious  objection  was 

46 


departmp:ntal  inaccuracies. 

never  raised."  This  is  almost  a  complete  mass  of  inaccuracies.  it 
is  true  that  Mr.  Ballantyne  lodged  an  appeal,  but  he  did  not  think 
it  worth  while  to  appear.  He  was  not  "represented  by  a  prominent 
Wellington  solicitor,"  nor  by  anyone  else;  neither  was  his  case  "care- 
fully fought  out."  His  employer  engaged  the  solicitor  and  appealed 
to  the  Court  on  the  ground  that  Ballantyne,  who  was  a  surveyor,  was 
engaged  on  work  of  national  importance.  When  a  telegram  was  sent 
by  the  military  authorities  to  Mr.  Ballantyne  asking  why  he  did  not 
parade,  he  replied,  briefly:   "Conscientious  Objector." 

In  view  of  these  and  other  facts,  it  is  not  a  matter  for  wonder 
that  the  time  came  when  Defence  Department  statements  concerning 
the  Conscientious  Objectors  were  received  with  little  or  no  credence. 

Meanwhile,  the  deported  men  were  undergoing  tortures  and  ex- 
periencing tyrannies  that  should  make  every  freedom-loving  man  and 
woman  in  New  Zealand  ashamed  to  remember. 


XIII.— ^niE  PROCESS  OF  CONVERSION. 

Speaking  at  the  Orphan's  Club  on  August  25,  1918,  Sir  James  Allen 
(designated  Orphan  Allen)  is  reported  by  the  Wellington  "Dominion"' 
to  have  said:  "Some  time  ago  fourteen  Objectors  went  to  the  front, 
and  every  one  of  them  are  now  fighting  with  their  units.  The  pro- 
cess of  their  conversion  he  did  not  know."  The  grammar  of  this  sen- 
tence may  with  fairness  be  debited  to  the  "Dominion."  But  for  the 
inaccuracy  of  it  the  Minister  must  carry  the  responsibility.  My  in- 
formation is  that  only  one  of  the  fourteen  men  took  a  gun,  that  others, 
also  surrendering  to  that  cruel  "process  of  conversion"  which  Sir 
James  Allen  told  the  Orphans  he  did  not  know  (but  which  will  be 
made  perfectly  clear  in  these  pages),  accepted  ambulance  or  other 
non-combatant  work,  while  some  went  to  the  brink  of  Hell  and  the 
borderland  of  Death  and  still  did  not  yield  to  the  military  "process  of 
conversion."  The  letters  which  follow — as  well  as  others  quoted  in 
my  controversy  with  Mr.  .Massey — will  give  some  indication  of  what 
that  "process"  amounted  to.  The  statements  of  Messrs.  Briggs,  Bal- 
lantyne, and  Baxter  in  later  chapters  will  make  the  "process"  still 
clearer. 

A  soldier  who  went  home  with  the  same  draft  as  the  C.O.'s. 
writing  from  Sling  Camp  on  October  12,  1917,  to  the  secretary  of  his 
Union  in  Southland,  first  of  all  explained  that  there  was  a  strike  on 
the  boat  which  carried  the  C.O.'s  away.  The  quality  of  the  stew 
supplied  to  the  soldiers  formed  the  basis  of  this  upheaval,  and  the  men 
"had  a  win."  Then  he  dcscril)ed  the  death  at  .sca  of  one  of  the  soldiers, 
who    had    been    parading    sick    every    morning,    but    who   nevertheless 

47 


ARMAGEDDON   OR   CALVARY. 

was  ordered  into  a  cold  shower  bath  at  six  in  the  morning  (as  all  the 
men  were).  The  sick  man  did  not  want  to  go  into  the  shower,  but 
"orders  are  orders  here."  He  eventually  took  the  shower,  "went  info 
the  hospital  at  3  in  the  afternoon,  died  at  8,  and  was  over  the  side  at 
11."  The  soldier  then  furnishes  an  account  of  the  treatment  accorded 
the  C.O.'s,  and  particularly  the  incident  of  their  being  placed  on  the 
passenger  deck  after  being  forcibly  dressed.  He  bitterly  complains 
that  the  Norman  Castle  carried  "eight  hundred  troops  and  over  a 
hundred  passengers,"  and  says  he  assumes  that  this  was  the  reason 
why  Germany  took  to  sinking  what  were  supposed  to  be  passenger 
boats. 

L.  J.  Kirwan  wrote  to  his  brother  from  Sling  Camp  on  Sep- 
tember 26,  1917: — "I  am  being  sent  to  France  to-night.  .  .  .  Our 
days  are  numbered.  Man's  life  is  not  worth  much  in  Prance.  I 
cannot  tell  you  how  we  have  been  treated.  ...  I  am  not  allowed 
to  write  what  I  would  like  to,  for  it  would  get  torn  up  by  the  censor. 
'Life  is  real,  life  is  earnest;  and  the  grave  is  not  its  goal.'" 

On  October  26,  1917,  T.  P.  Harland  wrote  from  Sling  Camp:  "Since 
last  writing  I  have  to  inform  you  that  Ballantyne  and  Briggs  (C.O.'s) 
have  been  sent  to  France  with  full  pack  up.  I  am  not  sure  whether 
Maguire  has  been  sent  yet.  I  aplied  for  leave  to  visit.  London,  but 
was  refused  because  I  would  not  drill,  otherwise  fuller  information 
would  have  been  available.  If  you  did  not  receive  my  previous  letter, 
please  allow  me  to  repeat  that  Little  and  Baxter  were  sent  to  France 
with  full  pack  up  and  handcuffed.  As  to  the  position  with  regard  to 
Penright  and  Adin,  I  have  no  information." 

On  October  26,  1917,  Harry  Patton  wrote  to  his  brother  from  Sling 
Camp:  "I  am  being  taken  to  France  to-night  under  arrest.  I  don't 
know  what  they  are  going  to  do  with  me  there,  but  you  will  perhaps 
hear  some  day.    I  shall  not  take  up  a  rifle  or  anything  like  that." 

"The  Friend,"  30th  November,  1917,  published  the  following:  — 
Harry  Patton,  one  of  the  New  Zealand  C.O.'s  sent  to  France,  writes: 
"I  received  your  letter  yesterday;  it  gave  me  a  great  deal  of  comfort. 
I  am  in  an  isolation  camp  at  present  at  Etaples  for  21  days.  Three  of 
us  reached  Etaple.s  on  28th  October,  refused  to  parade,  and  were  taken 
before  an  officer.  The  other  two  took  on  stretcher-bearing  in  the 
R.A.M.C.  Three  were  placed  in  a  tent  by  ourselves  for  three  days, 
and  then  transferred  to  the  R.A.M.C.  I  refused  to  parade,  and  was 
taken  before  the  officer.  He  told  me  I  had  been  transferred  to  the 
R.A..\I.(:.  ,  and  that  I  would  be  saving  life.  I  told  him  anything  I  did 
in  the  military  was  helping  to  take  life,  and  that  I  would  not  do  it, 
.sn  1  was  put  into  the  guardroom  for  a  few  days.  Then  I  was  ordered 
out  with  a  pack  on.  I  refused,  and  the  pack  was  fastened  to  me.  I 
n  fused  to  walk  with  the  pack,  and  was  dragged  about  two  hundred 
yards  and  plaecd  in  a  tent.  For  three  days  I  was  ordered  to  parade 
every  day;  ke))t  refu.sing;  had  officers  to  see  me,  trying  to  talk  me 
round;    taken   Ijefoie  a  chaplain,  gave  him  my  views;    was  placed   in 


THE    PROCESS    OF   CONVPmSION. 

detention.  They  tried  to  get  me  to  work  in  the  garden;  refused.  Then 
measles  broke  out.  There  is  another  CO.  in  the  guardroom  named 
Briggs,  who  has  relations  in  Yorkshire.  Three  other  C.O.'s  have  been 
sent  up  to  the  firing-line — Little,  Baxter,  and  Ballantyne.  I  don't 
know  what  has  become  of  them.  The  officer  told  me  I  would  be  sent 
up  there,  too,  and  would  probably  be  shot.  The  two  in  the  R.A.M.C. 
have  refused  to  take  the  oath  or  to  take  pay;  so  I  don't  know  how 
they  will  get  on." 

On  December  12,  1917,  Fred  Adin  wrote  from  Sling  Camp  to  his 
sister:  "I  hope  you  won't  think  ill  of  me  for  doing  what  I  have  done, 
but  it  was  a  matter  of  life  or  death.  A  few  weeks  more  of  imprison- 
ment would  have  killed  me.  I  was  nothing  but  skin  and  bone  when 
I  came  out  of  the  hospital,  and  I  could  not  have  stood  it  if  I  had 
gone  back  to  prison.  Nobody  knows  what  we  put  up  with  on  the  trip 
across  and  after  we  arrived  here.  I  could  tell  you  something  that 
would  startle  you,  but  it  is  over  now,  so  I  will  say  nothing  about  it.'" 
He  then  went  on  to  say  that  he  hoped  his  action  would  not  make  it 
harder  for  his  two  brothers^both  C.O.'s  in  New  Zealand.  Writing  to 
his  mother  he  said:  "Now  I  have  given  in  I  shall  be  able  to  write  to 
you" — showing  that  he  was  not  allowed  to  write  while  refusing  ser- 
vice. 

On  March  5,  1918,  from  "Somewhere  in  France,"  Archibald  Baxter 
wrote  to  his  parents  in  Dunedin: — "My  Dear  Father  and  Mother,— I 
have  just  time  to  send  you  this  brief  note.  I  am  being  sent  up  the 
lines  to-morrow.  I  have  not  heard  where  Jack  and  Sandy  are.  As 
far  as  military  service  goes,  I  am  of  the  same  mind  as  ever.  It  is 
impossible  for  me  to  serve  in  the  army.  I  would  a  thousand  times 
rather  be  put  to  death,  and  I  am  sure  that  you  all  believe  the  stand 
I  take  is  right.  I  have  never  told  you  since  I  left  N.Z.  of  the  things 
I  have  passed  through,  for  I  know  how  it  would  hurt  you.  I  only  tell 
you  now,  so  that,  if  anything  happens  to  me,  you  will  know.  I  have 
suffered  to  the  limit  of  my  endurance,  hut  I  will  never  in  my  sane 
senses  surrender  to  the  evil  power  that  has  fixed  its  roots  like  a 
cancer  on  the  world.  I  have  been  treated  as  a  soldier  wjio  disobeys 
(No.  1  Field  Punishment).  That  is  hard  enough  at  this  time  of  the 
year,  but  what  made  it  worse  for  me  was  that  I  was  bound  to  refuse 
to  do  military  work,  even  as  a  prisoner,  it  is  not  possible  for  me  to 
tell  in  words  what  I  have  suffered.  But  you  will  be  glad  to  know 
that  I  have  met  with  a  sreat  many  men  who  have  shown  me  th'i 
.greatest  kindness.  I  know  that  your  prayers  for  nie  are  not  in  vain. 
I  will  pray  for  you  all  to  the  last;  it  is  all  I  can  do  for  you  now.  If 
you  hear  that  I  have  served  in  the  Army  or  that  1  have  taken  my 
own  life,  do  not  believe  that  I  did  it  in  my  sound  mind.     I  never  will." 

On  May  It,  1!)1S,  the  Base  Records  Office,  Wellington,  forwarded  a 
communication  to  Mr.  Baxter's  father  as  follows:  "Dear  Sir, — Re 
47841  Ptc.  Archibald  Baxter,  I  have  to  advise  you  that  a  cablegram 
has  been  received  from  overseas,  stating  that  the  above-named  soldier 


ARMAGEDDON   OR   CALVARY. 

was  admitted  to  hospital,  United  Kingdom,  and  that  his  mental  condi- 
tion was  causing  anxiety.  I  sincerely  trust  that  with  care,  rest  and 
attention,  Pte.  Baxter  will  soon  be  restored  to  his  natural  condition." 

On  September  4,  1918,  Garth  Ballantyne  wrote  from  France  to  hU 
mother:  "Little  and  I  joined  up  with  the  Division  about  five  days  ago. 
We  came  at  a  bad  time,  as  they  were  in  the  middle  of  a  big  stunt.  I 
am  now  stretcher-bearing  in  the  Hawke's  Bay  Co.,  1st  W.I.B.  We 
both  worked  on  the  same  stretcher  most  of  the  time,  I  myself  com- 
ing through  so  far  untouched,  but  Little  was  wounded  two  days  ago. 
He  was  hit  with  a  machine  gun  bullet  while  he  and  I  and  two  otfiers 
were  attempting  to  get  another  man  out.  ...  I  thoroughly  hate 
the  whole  business,  although  in  this  particular  job  there  is  the  satis- 
faction of  knowing  that  you  are  helpmg  other  poor  fellows  who  are 
suffering." 

In  October,  1918,  Sir  James  Allen  found  it  necessary  to  issue  a 
second  printed  document  containing  "official  statements"  as  to  the 
case  of  Archie  Baxter  and  the  remainder  of  the  fourteen  deportees.  This 
new  "statement"  contained  the  allegation  that  Baxter  "is  apparently 
of  a  surly,  morose  disposition,  and  does  not  say  much."  Sir  James 
further  declared  that  "the  medical  examiners  found  that  he  was  not 
insane,  and  that  he  did  not  require  to  be  sent  to  a  hospital,  mental 
or  otherwise."  In  view  of  this  statement,  it  was  surely  cruel  and 
bordering  on  the  brutal  to  notify  Mr.  Baxter's  parents  (as  was  done 
on  May  14,  1918)  to  the  effect  that  he  had  been  "admitted  to  hospital, 
as  his  mental  condition  was  causing  anxiety." 

Sir  James  Allen,  in  the  ofiicial  statement  referred  to,  proceeded 
to  explain  the  nature  of  Field  Punishment  No.  1,  and  resented  the  term 
of  "crucifixion"  applied  to  this  form  of  punishment.  He  omitted  to  say 
that  the  British  soldiers  in  the  first  place  and  the  British  militarists  of 
the  Blatchford  type  in  the  second  place  were  responsible  for  this  term. 
Sir  James  Allen's  explanation  went  to  show  that  an  offender  sentenced 
to  Field  Punishment  No.  1  "may  be  kept  in  irons."  and  "when  in  irons 
he  may  be  attached  for  a  period  or  periods  not  exceeding  two  hours 
in  any  or^  day  to  a  fixed  object,  but  he  must  not  be  so  attached 
during  more  than  three  out  of  any  four  consecutive  days,  nor  duY"ing 
more  than  21  days  in  all."  It  was  further  explained  that  although 
"irons  should  be  used  when  available,"  when  irons  are  not  available 
"straps  or  ropes  should  be  used." 

The  soldiers  called  it  crucifixion  because  the  men  punished  were 
often  lashed  to  the  wheels  of  gun  carriages,  with  arms  and  legs  ex- 
tended, as  though  the  victim  were  on  a  cross.  But  Sir  James  Allen 
refrained  from  explaining  this.  A  British  soldier — a  well-to-do  busi- 
ness man,  who  enlisted  during  the  early  part  of  the  war^ — was  sub- 
jected to  this  atrocious  treatment,  and  died  under  it.  His  "offence" 
was  thai  he  had  lost  his  gas  helmet.  The  matter  was  ventilated  in 
the  Honsi  of  Commons,  and  fiercely  denounced  by  Robert  Blatchford 
in  the  ".Sunday  Pictorial."     I  had.  on  every  occasion  on  which  I  made 

50 


TiiK  pr()cp:s8  ok  conversion. 

reference  to  this  matter,  insisted  that  the  N.Z.  Government  should 
intimate  to  the  Imperial  authorities  that  it  would  not  tolerate  the 
infliction  of  such  a  barbarism  on  any  man  from  these  shores,  whether 
Boldier  or  CO. 

On  September  16,  1918,  there  came  from  Little's  mother  at  Hiku- 
rangi  to  Ballantyne's  mother  at  Wellington  a  brief  note  with  a  heart- 
broken message:  "Just  a  line  to  let  you  know  we  have  just  received 
a  wire  saying  that  our  dear  boy  died  of  wounds  on  September  4.  The 
cruel  brutes!     We  may  never  know  how  he  died." 

On  November  22,  1918,  Garth  Ballantyne  wrote  from  F'rance  to  his 
mother:  "At  last  the  long-looked-for  time  has  arrived,  and  hostilities 
have  ceased.  Peace  should  be  finally  settled  before  long.  The  cen- 
sorship has  been  slightly  lifted,  and  we  can  now  say  where  we  are  and 
where  we  have  been.  I  have  just  received  very  bad  news.  Wm. 
Little  died  from  the  wound  I  told  you  he  received.  I  have  written  to 
his  mother,  giving  her  as  many  details  as  I  could.  ...  At  least, 
he  died  trying  to  save  life  and  not  trying  to  take  it.  .  .  .  Sanderson 
has  been  sent  to  a  convalescent  home.  I  have  also  heard  that  Gray 
was  for  some  reason  returning.  Perhaps  you  will  hear  from  him. 
He  could  tell  you  much  that  would  interest  you." 


XIV.— PERIODS    OF    SUSPENSE. 

From  time  to  time  scraps  of  information  filtered  through  con- 
cerning the  deported  men,  mostly  in  surreptitiously-sent  letter.?  from 
soldiers  on  active  service  and  sometimes  at  the  hands  of  returning 
soldierK.  One  of  these  latter  i)rought  me  the  ticket  giving  the  "Re- 
.sult  of  N.Z.  Medical  Board,  Etaples,  9/10/1918,"  in  Mark  Briggs's  case. 
It  is  signed  by  Major  Bowerhank.  and  bears  out  Mark  Briggs's  siate- 
ment. 

The  parents  and  other  relatives  and  friends  of  the  deportod  men — 
overwhelmed  with  anxiety- -were  making  every  effort  to  ascertain 
their  fate,  for  a  considerable  time  without  success,  llelatives  of- 
several  of  the  men  wrote  to  me  repeatedly  to  tlie  fffcct  ihat  they 
could  obtain  no  information. 

On  May  .31,  l!t]8,  .Mr.  Ballantyne's  parents  were  forwarded  the  fol- 
lowing communication  from  the  Base  Records  Office,  Wellington:  "The 
latest  entry  on  your  son's  record  here  shows  that  he  was  transferred 
to  the  Canterbury  Regiment  on  the  11th  October.  1!t17.  and  that  on 
the  14th  November,  1917,  he  was  tried  by  field  general  courtmartial 
and  .s;enienced  to  live  years'  penal  servitude,  which  .sentence  was  com- 
muted by  l.t. -General  Sir  A.  J.  Godley  to  two  years'  imprisonment 
with  hard  labour." 

On   August   13.    1918,    Mrs.    Ballantyne    wrote    to    Sir   James   Allen: 

51 


ARMAGEDDON   OR   CALVARY. 

"Can  you  give  me  some  information  about  my  son,  Garth  C.  Ballantyne, 
who  was  deported.  It  is  now  13  months  since  you  sent  him  away, 
and  in  all  that  time  I  have  received  only  two  letters  from  him:  one 
written  on  the  voyage  and  one  from  a  military  prison  in  France,  dated 
December  12,  1917.  Since  then  I  have  had  no  letters  from  him,  and 
as  I  am  absolutely  certain  he  would  write  if  allowed  and  if  still  alive, 
you  will  understand  I  am  terribly  anxious.  Last  month  I  received  a 
notice  from  Base  Records  that  he  had  been  in  hospital  five  month.s 
previously.  Such  information  was,  of  course,  so  old  that  it  was 
worse  than  none.  I  notice  that  you  stated  publicly  that  you  were  ar- 
ranging for  parents  to  get  news  of  their  sons  every  three  months,  and 
should  like  to  know  when  we  may  expect  this  news." 

Sir  James  replied  on  August  18,  denying  that  any  restriction  was 
placed  on  the  correspondence  of  the  Objectors,  and,  after  giving  one 
or  two  very  meagre  items  of  information,  concluded:  "I  have  asked 
that  reports  shall  be  forwarded  to  New  Zealand  from  time  to  time 
respecting  soldiers  who  have  refused  to  perform  military  duties,  but 
no  report  has  yet  reached  me  concerning  your  son."  A  feature  of 
this  letter  is  the  studied  references  to  "Private"  Ballantyne,  and  the 
persistent  use  of  the  term  "soldier,"  as  though  the  object  of  the  letter 
was  to  impress  upon  the  stricken  mother  the  fact  that  the  military 
authorities  were  determined  that  she  should  be  made  to  feel  that  her 
son  was  a  "soldier,"  and  not  a  Conscientious  Objector. 

On  August  27,  1918,  Mrs.  Ballantyne  wrote  again  to  Sir  James 
Allen  challenging  his  statement  to  the  Orphans'  Club  that  everyone 
of  the  fourteen  "were  now  fighting  with  their  units,"  and  mentioning 
that  since  her  last  letter  she  had  had  a  few  lines  from  her  son,  who 
wrote  from  prison  and  gave  no  indication  that  he  intended  "fighting 
with  his  unit."  Mrs.  Ballantyne  added:  "You  expressed  a  hope  that 
'some  day  the  story  of  the  Conscientious  Objectors  would  be  written.' 
Your  wish  will  be  gratified,  for  it  is  being  written  even  now,  and  whea 
the  time  comes  for  it  to  be  published  it  will  not  be  the  C.O.'s  who  will 
be  shamed,  but  the  Government  that  has  so  ill-treated  them."  For  Sir 
James's  edification  she  quoted  from  the  writing  of  a  Religious  Ob- 
jector: "German  atrocities!  Are  the  people's  eyes  in  this  country  so 
fixed  on  France  that  they  cannot  see  what  is  going  on  in  their  own 
land?" 

Repeatedly  I  endeavored  to  secure  definite  information  concerning 
the  deportees,  but  without  avail.  Towards  the  close  of  the  1918  second 
session  (see  Hansard,  vol.  183,  page  1091),  I  asked  the  Minister  of 
Defence:  "(1)  Whether  he  will  furnish  a  report  as  to  the  number 
of  members  of  the  New  Zealand  Expeditionary  Forces  who  have  been 
subjected  to  the  punishment  known  as  crucifixion  or  Field  Punish- 
ment .No.  1?  (2)  Whether  Mark  Briggs,  one  of  the  fourteen  Con- 
scientious Objectors  deported  last  year,  is  now  in  hospital  and  classed 
C2  and  permanently  unfit;  and,  if  so,  when  will  he  be  returned  to 
New  Zealand?     (3)  Whether  he  will  call  for  a  full  report  in  connec- 

52 


PEKIODS   OF    SrSPENSK. 

tion  with  the  case  of  Mark  Briggs,  and  also  a  return  showing  the 
number  of  New  Zealand  Conscientious  Objectors  subjected  to  Field 
Punishment  No.  1?" 

The  Hon.  Sir  J.  Allen  (Minister  of  Defence)  replied:  "(1)  Field 
Punishment  No.  1  is  sparingly  inflicted  in  the  New  Zealand  Expedi- 
tionary Force.  If  the  honorable  gentleman  will  move  for  a  return  of 
the  number  of  soldiei's  of  the  New  Zealand  Expeditionary  Forces  who 
have  been  subjected  to  Field  Punishment  No.  1  the  matter  will  be 
considered.  (2)  The  Military  Service  Act  does  not  recognise  the  'Con- 
scientious Objector';  it  recognises  only  the  'Religious  Objector.'  It  is 
incorrect  to  term  the  fourteen  men  who  were  embarked  on  the  17th 
July.  1917,  'Conscientious  Objectors';  there  were  five  'Religious  Objec- 
tors' who  had  failed  to  satisfy  the  Military  Service  Boards,  and  the 
remainder  were  'Defiant  Objectors,'  including  four  deserters.  Mark 
Briggs  was  one  of  the  'Defiant  Objectors';  no  advice  has  been  re- 
ceived that  Mark  Briggs  is  now  in  hospital  and  classed  C2  and  per- 
manently unfit.  (3)  Mark  Briggs  was  an  auctioneer,  of  Palmerston 
North,  and  was  drawn  in  the  third  ballot.  He  appealed  on  the  grounds 
of  public  interest  and  hardship,  but  did  not  appear  in  support  of  his 
appeal,  which  the  Military  Service  Board  dismissed.  He  was  sent 
into  camp,  and  refused  to  obey  orders,  and  was  courtmartialled  in  New 
Zealand  for  disobedience.  He  was  embarked  on  the  17th  July,  1917, 
refused  duty  on  the  transport,  and  was  awarded  28  days'  detention  on 
the  15th  September,  1917;  arrived  in  Sling  on  the  25th  September; 
proceeded  overseas  on  the  20th  October,  1917,  and  was  posted  to  3rd 
Battalion,  Auckland  Regiment,  on  the  11th  December,  1917;  by  orders 
dated  the  21st  January,  1918,  it  appears  that  he  was  awarded  28  days' 
Field  Punishment  No.  1.  Unless  the  fourteen  men  embarked  on  the 
17th  July,  1917,  are  regarded  as  'Conscientious  Objectors'  (which 
would  be  incorrect),  no  New  Zealand  'Conscientious  Objectors'  have 
been  subjected  to  Field  Punishment  No.  1." 

In  the  middle  of  1918,  several  returned  soldiers  came  to  my  resi- 
dence at  Brooklyn  and  recounted  to  me  some  of  the  tortures  in- 
flicted upon  Mark  Briggs.  On  the  strength  of  their  report.  I  made  my 
statement  on  the  floor  of  the  House  on  the  night  of  December  6,  1918, 
during  the  course  of  my  speech  in  opposition  to  the  third  reading  of 
the  Bill  to  deprive  Conscientious  Objectors  of  their  franchise  and  civil 
rights  generally,  when  I  said:  "Take  one  particular  case — that  of  Mr. 
Mark  Briggs,  one  of  the  fourteen  men  deported.  .  .  .  On  one 
occasion  he  was  dragged  with  ropes  around  him  through  shell 
craters  and  loft  almost  for  dead — not  by  the  soldiers,  but  by  the 
military  police — and  the  soldiers  were  so  exasperated  that  on  that 
particular  night  they  went  round  with  hand  grenades  looking  for  the 
police;  so  great  was  the  respect  which  Briggs  had  won  from  the  sol- 
diers themselves  by  the  attitude  he  had  taken  up.  Fortunately,  the 
police  were  out  of  the  way.  and  nothing  happened." 

In  due  time  the  deported  men   began  to  arrive  back   in  New  Zea- 


ARMAGEDDON    OR   CALVARY. 

land,  and  it  was  then  that  their  friends  found  themselves  listening  to 
calmly-told  stories  of  atrocities  perpetrated  and  brutalities  endured — 
stor'es  woven  out  of  a  period  of  wretchedness  in  which  the 
wild  spirit  of  the  primitive  actuated  the  torturers  and  the  firm  purpose 
of  a  lofty  principle  inspired  the  tortured — stories  to  make  the  blooi 
run  cold  with  horror  or  flame  righteously  into  indignation  and  shame. 
And  it  is  here  that  I  purpose  letting  three  of  the  men  who  endured 
write  into  this  history  their  own  terrible  experiences  in  their  own 
honest  language — three  of  the  men  who,  out  of  the  night  that  covered 
ihcm,  "black  as  the  pit  from  pole  to  pole,"  had  reason  to  thank 
^'whatever  gods  there  be"  for  their  unconquerable  souls.  The  three 
chapters  which  follow  are  from  the  pens  of  Messrs.  Briggs,  Baxter,  and 
Ballantyne.  Others  of  the  fourteen  may  have  other  nan-atives  to 
?tartle  all  that  is  best  in  New  Zealand  out  of  a  lethargy  that  is 
twin  to  Oppression.  When  these  statements  are  read,  there  will  be 
310  righteously-minded  man  or  woman  who,  having  read  them,  will 
not  register  deep  vows  before  the  high  altars  of  Humanity  that  never 
a.t;ain  shall  the  dreadful  atavism  of  such  a  system  be  permitted  to 
steal  from  the  jungle  and  fasten  its  fangs  in  the  fair  white  throat  of 
onr  civilisation. 


XV.— MARK  BRIGGS. 

At  the  time  the  mis-called  National  Register  was  taken,  Mr.  Briggs 
was  employed  as  a  flax-worker  at  Manga-iti,  in  the  Waikato  district. 
In  filling  in  the  register  form,  he  stated  that  he  held  conscientious 
objections  to  military  service,  and  that  he  was  not  prepared  to  serve 
with  the  army  either  in  or  out  of  New  Zealand;  but  he  further  stated 
that  he  was  prepared  to  do  any  work  of  national  importance  (other 
than  war  work)  either  in  or  nut  of  New  Zealand,  provided  it  was 
work  for  which  he  wa.s  fitted. 

The  .story  which  follows  is  Mark  Briggs's  own  narrative:  — 

I  was  drawn  in  tlie  Third  Ballot,  and  duly  notified  by  registered 
If-tttr  to  parade  for  medical  examination.  I  ignored  the  order,  and 
swine  time  later  a  military  officer  with  the  rank  of  major  appeared 
at  my  place  of  business  and  handed  me  another  notice,  at  the  sam-? 
tiinf-  saying:  "You  will  parade  at  Duke  Street,  Palmerston  North, 
at  half-pa.st  nine  to-morrow  morning."  I  replied:  "I  will  not."  The 
.Major  then  said:  "Will  later  in  the  day  suit  you?"  I  said:  "No." 
H(  th(n  asked:  You  are  the  Mark  Briggs  who  was  drawn  in  the 
ballot,  are  you  not?"  I  replied:  "I  have  had  sufficient  notifications 
from    the    military    authorities    to   lead    me    to   believe    I    am."        The 

64 


MARK  HRIGGS. 

Major  then  wanted  to  know  when  it  would  suit  me  to  appear  for 
examination.  I  told  him  that  it  would  never  suit  me.  He  then 
said:  "All  right;  I'll  send  you  a  registered  notice  in  the  morning." 
The  Major  then  walked  out,  and  next  morning  the  third  notice 
(registered)  came  to  hand.  I  took  no  notice  of  this;  and  I  next 
received  a  card  ordering  me  to  parade  at  Palraerston  North  prepara- 
tory to  proceeding  to  camp.  Of  this  I  also  took  no  notice.  Then, 
after  all  these  interviews  and  notices,  I  found  my  name  gazetted  as 
"Missing  and  cannot  be  found."  When  this  Gazette  notice  appeared 
in  the  Palmerston  North  papers  it  was  the  source  of  much  amuse- 
ment. 

In  the  meantime,  I  lodged  an  appeal  on  formal  grounds,  solely  for 
the  purpose  of  gaining  time.  I  did  not  appear  to  support  the  appeal, 
which  was,  of  course,  dismissed. 

On  or  about  the  23rd  of  March,  1917,  at  nine  in  the  morning,  a 
police  officer  put  in  an  appearance  with  a  warrant  for  my  arrest, 
and  I  was  taken  to  the  Defence  Office,  where  I  was  asked  by  the 
officer  if  I  was  now  prepared  to  be  medically  examined.  I  replied, 
"No."  I  was  then  put  in  a  room  where  six  or  eight  red-caps  were 
amusing  themselves  playing  cards.  At  about  two  in  the  afternoon  I 
was  taken  to  the  military  barracks  by  two  red-caps.  I  was  next 
taken  before  the  higher  officers  and  was  asked  all  the  questions  on 
the  attestation  paper,  answering  "No"  in  practically  every  instance. 
I  was  then  taken  to  the  police  station  by  the  red  caps,  where  I 
remained  all  night,  and  next  day  taken  back  to  the  barracks  and 
presented  before  the  same  officers,  when  the  procedure  of  the  pre- 
ceding day  was  practically  gone  through  again.  The  officer  in  charge 
at  last  intimated  that  I  would  proceed  to  Trentham  at  11.30  that 
day.  "How  many  police  will  it  take  to  conduct  you  there?"  he  asked 
me.  I  replied:  "It  took  one  of  the  civil  police  to  arrest  me,  two 
military  police  to  bring  me  down  here  in  the  first  place,  two  to  take 
me  to  the  police  station,  and  four  to  fetch  me  from  there  down  here 
this  morning.  I  leave  you  to  be  the  judge."  He  then  said  he  sup- 
posed one  would  do,  and  immediately  ordered  one  of  the  military 
police  to  take  lue  to  Wellington,  at  the  same  time  handing  him  a  pair 
of  handcuffs.  I  was  brought  to  Wellington,  and  at  Larabton  Station 
was  met  by  Mr.  H.  K.  Holland,  then  editor  of  "The  .Maoriland 
Worker." 

I  was  taken  out  to  Trentham,  and  placed  in  Details  that  night. 
Tlu'  r>t'xt  morning  1  was  taken  before  Colonel  Potter,  Camp  Com- 
mandant, and  was  charged  with  disobeying  the  order  to  parade,  and 
the  charge  was  dismissed  on  technical  grounds.  I  was,  however,  not 
permitted  to  return  home;  l)ut  was  taken  to  the  Records  Office,  where 
an  attestation  paper  was  placed  before  me  and  I  was  requested  to  sign 
it.  which  I  refused  to  do.  I  was  then  placed  in  the  "clink."  The 
following  morning  I  was  again  taken  i)efore  Colonel  Potter,  and  was 
once  more  charged  with  having  disobeyed  a  lawful  command  given  by 


ARMAGEDDON    OR   CALVARY. 

my  superior  oflBcer.  After  evidence  had  been  tendered,  I  was  asked 
what  I  had  to  say  to  the  charge,  and  replied  that  I  didn't  admit 
that  I  had  a  superior  oflacer.  Colonel  Potter  asked  if  I  would  take  a 
sentence  from  him  or  be  tried  by  courtmartial.  I  replied  that  I 
would  not  take  his  sentence,  and  was,  accordingly,  remanded  for 
court-martial. 

A  day  or  two  later  I  was  taken,  along  with  Mr.  Levett,  from  the 
"clink"  to  the  medical  hut  by  the  military  police.  At  the  medical  hut 
I  was  subjected  to  an  examination  which  resolved  itself  into  a  heart 
test.  This  test  was  made  by  two  doctors,  and  the  papers  were  duly 
filled  in.  We  were  then  taken  back  to  the  "clink,"  and  on  the  way 
there  the  military  policeman  said:  "You  have  no  need  to  trouble; 
you'll  be  out  of  camp  in  three  days.  Have  a  look  at  this."  He  showed 
both  I.evett  and  myself  the  medical  report,  which  was  to  the  effect 
that  I  was  not  medically  fit  to  undergo  a  courtmartial  trial.  A  few 
dr-ys  later  I  was  taken  before  another  doctor,  and  by  him  was  passed 
fit  to  undergo  hard  labour,  etc.  That  day  I  was  courtmartialled, 
the  charge  being  the  stereotyped  one  of  disobeying  a  lawful  command. 
The  President  of  the  courtmartial  asked  me:  "Are  you  a  religious 
objector?"  I  replied  that  I  did  not  base  my  objections  on  religious 
grounds.  "What,  then,  do  you  stand  for?"  he  asked.  "For  the  liberty 
and  freedom  of  the  masses  of  the  people  of  New  Zealand,"  I  replied. 
"But,  my  dear  fellow,"  he  said,  "if  you  stood  for  the  liberty  and 
freedom  of  the  people  of  New  Zealand,  you'd  be  fighting  the  Germans. 
What  do  you  mean  when  you  say  you  stand  for  the  liberty  and  free- 
dom of  the  people?"  "I  stand  absolutely  opposed  to  the  Conscrip- 
tion Act,  which  was  placed  on  the  Statute  Book  by  a  few  irrespon- 
sible individuals,"  I  said.  He  retorted:  "You  elected  these  men  to 
Parliament  to  make  the  laws,  and  you  should  obey  them.".  "If  that 
is  your  contention,"  I  said,  "you  must  uphold  every  German  in  the 
trenches,  because  they  are  only  obeying  laws  made  similarly  by  the 
irresponsible  individuals  in  their  country."  He  didn't  reply  to  this; 
and  I  was  sentenced  to  thirty  days"  hard  labour  in  the  civil  prison, 
which  sentence  I  served  in  Mount  Cook  Prison.  At  the  end  of  thi 
thirty  days  I  was  taken  from  Mount  Cook  to  the  Terrace  Jail,  and 
handed  over  to  the  military  police.  I  was  next  taken  by  the  red-caps 
to  Alexandra  Barracks,  kept  there  a  few  hours;  then  taken  by  the 
military  police  to  the  police  station  at  T.ambton  Quay.  Late  that 
night  I  was  taken  from  there  to  Trentham.  Next  day  I  was  ordered 
to  take  my  kit  and  refused.  The  following  morning  I  was  again 
char^'od  before  Colonel  Potter  with  disobeying  a  lawful  command.  I 
aiiuiu  declined  to  receive  a  sentence  from  the  Colonel,  and  was  duly 
remanded  for  another  courtmartial.  I  went  through  the  usual 
iiKflica!  i)rocedurc,  and  was  again  passed  fit  for  hard  labour.  I  was 
once  more  courtmartialled  and  found  guilty,  and  after  waiting  a 
forinii-'hi  for  sentence,  was  told  that  "it  was  a  washout" — which  meant 
that  no  sentence  would  be  i)romul,aatcd. 

56 


MARK  HRICGS. 

A  few  days  later  I  was  again  taken  before  a  doctor,  and,  as  usual, 
passed  fit  to  undergo  hard  labour;  and  was  taken  without  any  notice 
whatever  straight  from  there  before  a  third  courtmartial,  and  again 
charged  with  disobeying  a  lawful  command.  When  asked  if  I  had 
anything  to  say,  I  raised  the  objection  that  the  military  law  required 
that  a  man  should  be  given  24  hoars'  notice  of  courtmartial  pro- 
ceedings, and  that  I  had  been  brought  there  at  a  moment's  notice. 
The  President  said.  "Oh,  that  doesn't  matter."  I  replied  that  if  that 
was  so  it  was  not  worth  my  while  putting  up  any  defence  whatever, 
and  accordingly  I  took  no  further  part  in  the  proceedings.  I  again 
had  to  wait  a  fortnight  before  sentence  was  pronounced.  It  proved 
to  be  84  days'  hard  labour.  Of  this  I  served  seven  weeks  at  Mount 
Cook  Prison. 

On  the  morning  of  July  13,  1917,  I  was  taken  from  Mount  Cook 
along  with  seven  others  to  the  Terrace  Jail.  Here  we  were  given  our 
own  clothes,  shaved,  and  kept  in  the  yard  all  day.  I  saw  Mr.  Peter 
Fraser  that  afternoon,  and  shook  hands  with  him  as  he  was  going 
in  to  his  cell.  We  were  kept  in  the  yard  until  after  dark,  when  we 
were  taken  inside  and  handed  over  to  a  military  escort,  which  out- 
numbered us  by  two  to  one.  Without  being  told  where  we  were 
going,  we  were  marched  through  the  streets  with  the  members  of  the 
escort  all  around  us,  and  in  this  way  were  taken  to  the  wharf,  where 
a  transport  was  lying.  By  this  time  we  recognised  that  the  move 
was  to  forcibly  transport  us.  When  we  reached  the  foot  of  the  gang- 
way, one  of  the  boys  in  the  front  rank  shouted:  "Are  we  going  to 
walk  up  the  gangway,  Mark?"  I  replied:  "Certainly  not."  We  were 
then  seized  and  forced  up  the  gangway.  As  they  were  taking  me  up 
I  called  out  to  the  wharf  labourers:  "You  can  tell  the  citizens  of 
Wellington  that  there  are  eight  conscientious  objectors  forcibly  de- 
ported in  civvie  clothes  from  New  Zealand."  They  replied:  "You 
have  our  sympathy."  I  answered  back:  "We  want  more  than  that." 
By  this  time  they  had  got  us  on  deck.  The  eight  of  us  were  pushed 
into  the  "clink"  together,  and  an  armed  guard  of  four  men  with  fixed 
bayonets  was  placed  on  the  inside  of  the  door  of  the  "clink,"  and  re- 
mained there  all  night. 

The  eight  men  thus  forcibly  placed  on  board  were:  Garth  Ballan- 
tyne,  Penwright,  Adin,  Gray.  Patten,  Saunderson,  Harland,  and  my- 
self. Next  morning  wo  wore  joined  by  the  three  Baxters  and 
IJttle,  and  later  Maguire  and  Kirwan  were  brought  from  Tren- 
tham  Camp  and  placed  along  with  us.  That  afternoon  (July  14)  the 
boat,  the  Waitomata,  pulled  out  from  the  wharf  and  sailed. 

The  "clink"  was  about  22  feet  by  ]0  feet,  and  tho  first  night  out 
the  whole  fourteen  of  us  wore  compelled  to  sloo])  thore.  There  were 
no  basins,  and  twolvo  oiil  of  the  fourteen  were  sea-sick.  Penwright 
and  myself  alone  were  able  to  keep  right,  and  we  attended  to  the 
others.  The  state  of  the  cabin  can  be  well  imagined.  Penwright 
and   I   cleaned   it   up   in   t)ie   luorning.  after  geitini;   a  drink   of  tea   for 


ARMAGEDDON    OR    CALVARY. 

the  others.  We  both  got  ill  as  a  result  of  the  state  of  the  cabin. 
We  were  kept  in  this  "clink"  all  next  day,  being  left  to  ourselves. 
The  third  day  out  a  non-commissioned  officer  told  us  we  were  to  do 
"fatigue."  We  said  we  would  not  go  out.  "Then,"  he  said,  "we  will 
drag  you  out."     I  said,  "Carry  on."     W^e  were  not  dragged  out. 

Th6  fourth  day  out  the  same  n.c.o.  came  to  the  "clink"  again,  this 
time  with  a  guard,  took  out  the  kits  which  had  been  placed  there, 
ordered  us  out,  and  when  we  refused  to  go  carried  us  out  separately, 
stripped  us  on  the  hatchway,  and  forcibly  dressed  us  in  khaki.  We 
were  stripped  and  dressed  in  the  presence  of  hundreds  of  men. 
After  we  had  all  been  dressed,  we  were  pushed  back  into  the  "clink." 
As  soon  as  we  were  back  in  the  "clink"  I  started  to  undress,  when 
some  of  the  guard  who  had  dressed  us  came  over  to  stop  me.  Mem- 
bers of  the  guard  asked  me  to  keep  my  clothes  on  until  they  were 
out  of  the  way.  I  refused.  An  officer  standing  in  the  "clink"  door- 
way said,  "Tie  him  up."  "Yes,"  I  said;  "put  me  in  the  darkest 
dungeon  on  the  boat,  and  I'll  take  them  off  there."  Eventually  they 
went  away,  and  we  all  took  the  khaki  off.  They  had  kept  our 
civilian  clothes,  and  we  remained  dressed  in  nothing  but  our  under- 
clothing until  after  tea  that  evening,  when  the  kits  were  brought 
back  containing  our  clothes.  We  immediately  donned  our  own  things 
and  .shoved  the  khaki  back  in  the  kits.  On  this  day  we  were  given  a 
short   ci-op. 

From  this  fourth  day  out  until  the  day  before  Capetown  was 
reached,  we  were  occasionally  allowed  on  deck  for  fresh  air. 
Kirwan  was  in  hosi)ital  from  the  third  day  out  until  we  reached 
Capetown.  Before  Capetown  was  reached,  however,  measles  broke 
out  on  the  boat.  Now,  the  "clink"  was  situated  under  the  poop  deck, 
and  the  other  part  of  the  ship  under  the  poop  deck  was  made  an 
isolation  place  for  the  measles  cases.  Barring  one  porthole  in  the 
"clink"  and  one  in  the  adjoinin,g  cell,  the  only  ventilation  for  the 
"clink"  came  through  the  isolation  (hospital)  ward.  It  was  not  to  be 
wondered  at  that  four  of  the  C.O.'s  developed  measles,  three  (Archie 
Baxter,  J.  Baxter,  and  Sanderson)  being  taken  off  at  Capetown,  too 
ill   to  proceed   further. 

The  day  before  our  arrival  at  Capetown  we  w^ere  told  by  the  n.c.o. 
that  we  should  have  to  help  load  the  boat  there.  We  intimated  that 
wc  would  not  do  it,  whereupon  we  were  told  that  if  we  refused  we 
should  1){  kept  below  all  the  time  the  boat  remained  at  Capetown. 
Cons^equently,  during  the  whole  fortnight  we  were  at  Captown,  we  were 
not  allowed  on  deck  until  we  were  transhipped  to  the  Norman 
Castle  f)n  the  day  we  were  to  sail  for  England. 

The  first  niuht  we  spent  on  the  Norman  Castle  we  were  placed 
on  ih(  i)oop  deck,  and  the  only  shelter  overhead  was  the  gun  plat- 
form, the  planks  of  which  were  well  apart.  We  suffered  intensely 
from  the  cold,  not  averaging  two  blankets  each.  Next  morning  two 
lieutenants  came  along,  and  told  us  we  had   to  have  a  bath.      I  said: 

58 


MARK   HRKJOS. 

"Very  good;  we  haven't  had  enough  bathing  since  wo  left  New 
Zealand;  hut,"  I  added,  "if  those  men  are  bringing  up  the  l<ils  for 
the  purpose  of  getting  us  into  khaki,  I  am  not  going  to  help  you  by 
taking  these  clothes  off — you'll  have  to  take  them  from  me  forcibly." 
One  of  the  lieutenants  replied:  "We  will  soon  do  that."  Orders  were 
now  given,  and  our  clothes  were  stripped  from  us  and  thrown  over- 
board. The  ship's  hose,  used  for  washing  down  the  decks,  was  then 
turned  on  us,  after  which  they  dried  us  in  a  sort  of  way  with  towels, 
and  forcibly  dressed  us  up  in  khaki.  We  were  then  left  alone  on  tho 
poop  deck,  and  eight  of  us  at  once  stripped  off  the  khaki,  and  then 
went  ail  day  in  underclothing.  The  following  day  they  came  alon,; 
again,  and  this  time  the  underclothing  was  taken  from  us  by  force, 
again  the  hose  was  played  on  us,  and  again  we  were  dressed  in  khaki. 
As  soon  as  the  guard  left  us  we  promptly  divested  ourselves  of  the 
military  clothing,  and  now  remained  clad  only  in  shirt  and  singlet. 
During  the  whole  day  this  was  our  sole  attire.  Next  morning  they 
stripped  us  naked,  and  this  time  redressed  us  in  just  khaki  tunic 
and  pants.  We  immediately  removed  these  and  went  naked,  usin-; 
towels  for  loin  cloths.  It  has  to  be  remembered  that  the  Norman 
Castle  carried  passengers  as  well  as  troops,  and  apparently  the 
military  martinets  thought  we  would  not  strip  the  khaki  off  in  view 
of  these.  However,  we  remained  in  this  stale  during  the  whole  of 
the  remainder  of  the  journey,  until  within  three  days'  sail  of  Plymouth, 
when  we  managed  to  get  possession  of  a  shirt  and  underpants.  We 
arrived   in   Plymouth   Harbour  clad   in   these. 

It  may  be  mentioned  that  all  through  the  danger  zone  wc  were 
kept  down  below  under  lock  and  key.  When  the  guard  had  to  take 
anyone  up  to  the  latrines  he  left  the  door  locked.  Had  anything  hap- 
pened he  could  not  possibly  have  got  down  to  release  us. 

The  morning  we  arrived  at  Plymouth,  and  on  which  we  were  to 
disembark,  we  were  again  forcibly  dressed  in  khaki.  Sevt>ral  of  us 
refused  to  walk  ashore.  I  was  dragged  along  the  deck  by  \hv  n.e.o., 
and  was  then  seized  and  frog-marched  down  the  .gangway  on  to  the 
lighter.  I  was  next  carried  ashf)re  I'rom  the  lighter,  and,  refusing  to 
walk  to  the  train,  was  lifted  on  to  a  truck  and  wheeled  to  the  car- 
riage, into  whicli  I  was  lifted.  Reaching  the  Hag  station  at  which 
we  were  to  disembark  for  Sling  Cam]),  I  refused  to  leave  ihc  train, 
and  was  dragged  out,  and  left  lying  on  the  platform  in  charge  of  a 
non-commissione(i  ofhcer  until  a  military  escort  came  from  the  camp 
to  take  me  along.  Arrived  at  Sling  Camp,  I  was  i)ut  ii\  what  was 
termed  the  Wellington  "clink."  There  was  a  "clink"  for  each  dis- 
trict. 1  found  Ballantyni\  .MaLjuire.  and  Adin  there.  While  liaving 
tea  a  sergeant-major  came  and  asked  for  my  name  and  regimental 
number.  I  gave  him  my  name,  but  told  him  1  recognised  no  regi- 
mental number.  He  aimrily  ordered  me  to  stand  up  when  speaking 
to  him.  This  I  refused  to  do,  and  another  n.c.o.  unsuccessfully  en- 
deavoured to  drag  me  to  my  feet.      The  sergeant-major  then  declared 

.".9 


ARMAGEDDON   OR   CALVARY. 

that  I  was  to  have  no  tea  if  I  refused  to  obey  orders,  and  I  thereupon 
walked  away,  and  eventually  went  to  bed  without  tea. 

Adin  was  taken  away  to  the  hospital;  and  on  the  morning  after 
our  arrival,  Ballantyne,  Maguire  and  myself  refused  to  wear  the 
khaki,  and  were  each  forcibly  dressed,  and  were  now  placed  in  sep- 
arate cells.  Immediately  we  were  in  the  cells,  we  removed  the  khaki 
again.  An  escort  came  in,  and  once  more  forcibly  dressed  us  and 
handcuffed  us,  fastening  our  hands  behind  our  backs.  We  were  now 
ordered  to  be  placed  on  bread  and  water  for  two  days.  We  refused 
to  take  the  bread  and  water.  After  tea-time  the  handcuffs  were  taken 
off,  and  imme'diately  our  hands  were  free  we  again  stripped  off  the 
khaki.     In  the  meantime,  we  were  given  our  blankets  and  mattresses. 

On  the  day  following  our  arrival  ^t  Sling  Gamp,  I  was  lying  on  the 
floor  of  the  cell,  in  an  endeavour  to  rest  my  shoulders.  The  effect  of 
the  hands  being  fastened  behind  for  hours  was  to  cause  the  shoulders 
to  ache  distressfully,  and  the  only  possible  way  to  relieve  the  pain 
was  to  lie  face  downward  on  the  floor.  While  in  that  position, 
Brigadier-General  Fulton  (the  officer  in  charge  at  Sling  Camp)  en- 
tered the  cell.  As  soon  as  he  saw  the  position  I  was  in,  he  ex- 
claimed: "Tut,  tut,  tut!  How  long  is  this  going  to  last?"  "As  long 
as  the  military  oppression  lasts,"  I  replied.  He  then  asked  me  if 
he  had  the  irons  removed  from  my  wrists  would  I  promise  to  wear 
the  khaki  for  a  couple  of  days  until  he  could  get  word  from  the  New 
Zealand  Government  as  to  what  he  was  to  do  with  me.  I  said:  "I 
will  make  you  a  faithful  promise  that  when  the  handcuffs  are  re- 
moved I  will  immediately  remove  the  khaki."  He  said  that  in  that 
case  he  should  have  to  leave  the  irons  on  me,  as  "it  was  his  duty 
to  consider  the  health  of  the  men  affected,  and,  of  course,  he  could 
not  let  them  go  without  clothing." 

On  the  day  following  that  on  which  we  had  been  ordered  bread 
and  water,  the  doctor  came  into  my  cell,  and  noticing  the  bread  and 
water  on  the  floor  of  the  cell  untouched,  he  asked  me  if  I  was  not 
hungry.  I  replied  that  was  a  foolish  question  seeing  that  I  had 
had  nothing  to  eat  all  the  previous  day.  He  then  asked  me  why  I 
didn't  take  the  bread  and  water.  I  answered  that  I  had  never  lived 
on  that  fare  before,  and  if  that  was  the  best  they  could  offer  me 
they  had  better  keep  it.  He  then  took  my  pulse,  and  casually  re- 
marked:  "You'll  do  until  to-morrow  morning." 

A  Methodist  chaplain  also  visited  me,  and  having  listened  to  my 
experiences  on  the  boat,  asked  me  if  it  was  worth  while  one  man 
knocking  his  head  against  a  stone  wall.  I  asked  him  how  he  could 
possibly  say  a  thing  like  that  when,  Sunday  after  Sunday,  in  his  own 
church,  he  sang: — 

Dare  to  be  a  Daniel, 

Dare  to  stand  alone. 
Dare   to  have  a  purpose  firm, 
And  dare  to  make  it  known. 
60 


MARK  BRIGGS. 

He  eventually  told  rae  that  his  own  conscience  would  condemn  him 
if  he  endeavoured  to  sway  me  from  my  determination. 

We  remained  twenty-three  days  in  all  in  solitary  confinement  cells, 
every  day  of  which  we  were  forcibly  dressed  and  handcuffed.  The 
only  time  during  which  we  were  freed  from  the  handcuffs  was  at 
meal-times,  and  while  we  mopped  out  the  cells  immediately  after 
breakfast.  We  did  this  latter  work  because  we  desired  to  keep  our 
cells  clean. 

In  the  interval  we  were  visited  by  various  officers,  one  of  the  most 
prominent  of  whom  would  come  into  the  cell  and  abuse  us.  On  one 
occasion  this  officer  came  into  my  cell  with  a  doctor,  and  ordered  the 
handcuffs  to  be  taken  off.  As  soon  as  this  was  done  I  removed  the 
khaki,  and  stacked  it  up  on  the  floor  between  the  officer  and  myself. 
While  I  was  doing  this  he  ordered  me  not  to  take  my  vmiform  off, 
but  I  persisted.  He  then  told  me  to  take  the  underclothing  off  as 
well,  but  I  told  him  that  was  not  necessary — that  I  merely  took  the 
uniform  off  to  demonstrate  that  they  would  never  make  a  soldier  of 
me.  The  doctor  then  subjected  me  to  a  cursory  medical  examina- 
tion, after  which  I  was  once  again  forcibly  dressed  and  handcuffed. 

On  another  occasion  the  officer  referred  to  came  into  my  cell,  and 

looking  at  me  said:   "You  b y  ape!       I'm  giving  my  life's  blood 

for  my  country  and  the  like  of  you."  On  yet  another  occasion  he 
came  to  the  cell  and  said:  "I  know  what's  wrong  with  you,  Briggs; 
you  have  Labour  tendencies."  I  said:  "What  if  I  have?"  He  asked: 
"Do  you  know  what  we  are  going  to  do  with  Labour  after  this  war 
is  over?"  I  said:  "No;  I  don't  pretend  to  know."  He  said:  "We 
are  going  to  finish  them  at  the  point  of  the  bayonet.  Do  you  know 
what  I  would  do  with  you  if  I  had  my  way?  I  would  stand  you  with 
your  back  to  the  wall  and  riddle  you  with  bullets."  I  quietly  re- 
plied: "Why  don't  you  do  it?"  Another  day  he  came  along  with  the 
adjutant  and  the  regimental  S.M.  The  officer  ordered  the  handcuffs 
to  be  removed.  Immediately  this  was  done  he  ordered  me  to  get 
fully  dressed  and  go  out  on  parade.  While  he  was  giving  the  order 
I  was  removing  the  khaki.  The  adjutant  then  explained  the  serious 
nature  of  the  position  I  was  placing  myself  in,  and  said  he  would 
give  me  another  chance.  Thereupon  the  order  to  get  into  full  dress 
and  parade  was  repeated.  I  told  the  officer  I  absolutely  refused  to 
obey  the  order.  I  was  now  re-dressed  by  force,  and  left  in  the  cell 
handcuffed.  That  evening  I  was  taken  to  the  guard-room  in  front 
of  the  Colonel,  and  charged  with  disobeying  an  order.  This  Colonel 
insisted  that  I  must  address  him  as  "Sir."  I  told  him  tliat  if  I  had 
to  choose  between  calling  him  "Sir"  and  never  speaking  again  I 
would  choose  the  latter  alternative.  He  then  asked  me  if  I  would 
accept  a  penalty  from  him,  and  I  told  him  I  would  not.  We  (Bal- 
lantyne,  .Maguire  and  myself)  were  next  brought  up  for  "summary  of 
evidence"  prior  to  courtmartial,  my  two  comrades  having  also  refus- 

i\ 


ARMAGEDDON    OK    CALVARY. 

ed  to  obey  the  order  to  dress  and  parade.  We  refused  to  make  any 
statement  by  way  of  "summary,"  and  heard  nothing  further. 

On  September  15  I  had  been  sentenced  to  twenty-eight  days'  deten- 
tion. This  sentence  expired  on  October  13,  but  I  was  still  kept  in 
solitary  confinement,  notwithstanding  that  I  had  no  sentence.  I  re- 
mained in  solitary  until  I  was  taken  to  France. 

On  one  occasion  when  the  officer  ordered  me  to  go  out  for  ex- 
ercise in  charge  of  a  military  escort,  and  I  refused,  he  threatened  to 
put  a  rope  around  me  and  drag  me  behind  a  motor  waggon.  I  told 
him  that  was  the  only  way  he  would  get  me  out.  One  Sunday  morn- 
ing he  came  and  asked  me  if  I  would  like  to  go  to  church.  I  said, 
"Yes."  He  then  told  me  that  to  go  to  church  I  would  have  to  get 
into  full  military  dress.  I  told  him  that  if  that  was  all  their  religion 
amounted   to   I    would   stay   away   from    church. 

In  front  of  three  of  us,  and  with  a  number  of  n.c.o's  present,  a 
quartermaster-sergeant  once  made  an  unprintable  threat  as  to  what 
he  would  do  with  the  sister  of  a  conscientious  objector  if  he  had  the 
opportunity. 

Nearing  the  end  of  the  time  we  were  in  Wellington  "clink,"  Gen- 
eral Fulton  visited  us,  and  told  me  that  it  appeared  to  him  there  was  a 
leader  among  the  conscientious  objectors,  and  immediately  after  this 
Ballantyne  and  .Maguire  were  removed  to  other  "clinks,"  and  I  was 
taken  to  Canterbury  "clink."     On  arrival     there  I  was  handed  over  to 

a  non-commissioned  officer.     The  n.c.o.  said:     "Oh,  this  is  the  b d, 

is  it?     We'll  b y  soon  tame  you  here.     You  can  have  it  either  hot 

or  cold,  whichever  you  like."  I  replied:  "If  that's  so,  it  might  as 
well  be  hot  from  the  jump."  Up  to  this  time  I  was  handcuffed  with 
my  hands  in  front,  but  this  order  was  now  reversed,  and  my  hands 
were  ironed  behind  me.  I  had  had  breakfast  in  the  Wellington  "clink" 
before  leaving.      Some  time  after  I  had  been   in   the  cell   a   sergeant 

came  and  asked  me:  "Do  you  want  any  b y  dinner?"       I  replie;i 

not  if  I  had  to  look  to  the  like  of  him  for  it.  No  dinner  was  brought 
to  me.  After  dinner  I  was  visited  by  an  officer,  who  asked  me  how  I 
was  feeling.  I  replied:  "As  well  as  can  be  expected."  The  officer 
then  asked  the  n.c.o.  if  I  had  had  my  food  all  right.  The  n.c.o.  told 
him  that  I  had  only  come  in  that  morning  and  wouldn't  have  my 
dinner.  The  officer  then  asked  me  why  this  was  so.  I  told  him  I 
could  see  through  the  methods  that  were  being  employed  against  me, 
that  I  had  had  twenty-three  days'  solitary  confinement  in  Wellington 
"clink,"  and  apparently  the  military  police  didn't  regard  that  punish- 
ment a.s  severe  enough,  and  I  had  been  shifted  up  there  for  the  pur- 
pose f)!  being  bullied  into  being  a  soldier.  I  further  told  him  that  to 
pifjve  to  him  and  the  rest  of  the  military  authorities  that  bullying 
was  no  aood  in  my  case,  I  would  neither  eat  nor  drink  as  long  as  I 
was  left  in  that  "clink."  He  threatened  that  if  I  did  that  they  would 
forcibly  feed  me.  I  at  once  proceeded  to  put  my  promise  into  opera- 
tion.     I'Y)r  the  first  two  or  three  days  they  didn't  bring  me  any  food; 

62 


MARK  BRIGGS. 

at  meal  times  they  would  jvist  come  and  ask  if  1  wanted  anything  to 
eat,  and  on  every  occasion  I  said  "No.  "  I  fought  against  the  pangs 
of  hunger  in  the  daytime  and  at  night  slept  soundly.  During  the 
latter  part  of  the  time  food  was  placed  in  ray  cell  regularly,  but  1 
never  touched  it.  On  every  occasion  that  the  dinner  was  brought  in  the 
handcuffs  were  removed,  and  also  on  every  occasion  that  the  hand- 
cuffs were  taken  off  I  removed  the  khaki,  and  was  always  forcibly 
re-dressed.  The  doctor  came  in  day  by  day  and  took  my  pulse. 
After  I  had  been  some  three  days  without  food,  the  principal  medical 
officer  came  in  in  addition  to  the  ordinary  doctor.  He  was  very 
courteous,  and  endeavoured  to  tempt  me  with  suggestions  about 
drinks  of  hot  milk,  etc.  I  maintained  the  hunger  strike  from  Tuesday 
morning  until  Saturday  night — practically  five  days. 

On  the  Saturday  morning  I  was  taken  to  the  barber  and  shaved. 
About  four  in  the  afternoon  they  came  and  put  putties  on  me,  and 
also  a  pack  on  my  shoulders,  and  took  me  out  of  the  "clink."  There 
I  saw  a  medical  officer,  who  again  endeavoured  to  persuade  me  to  have 
something  to  eat.  I  refused,  and  a  Red  Cross  car  was  then  brought 
round,  and  I  was  placed  in  this  with  an  escort  and  a  medical  officer,  and 
taken  to  the  train,  on  which  I  was  placed  with  a  draft  for  France. 
This  was  towards  the  end  of  October. 

We  reached  Salisbury  Station  at  7  p.m.  and  I  had  something  to 
eat  there  with  the  guard.  The  men  I  travelled  with  were  very  friend- 
ly. We  remained  at  Folkestone  for  a  day  or  so,  and  then  proceeded 
on  to  the  boat  For  France.  I  was  not  ironed  while  being  taken 
across  to  France,  although  some  of  the  other  conscientious  objectors 
were  taken  across  in  irons.  We  landed  at  Boulogne,  and  remained 
there  one  night  at  what  they  called  "One  Blanket  Hill."  Next  morn- 
ing we  were  taken  in  motor  lorries  to  Etaples,  which  was  then  the 
Base  Camp. 

When  the  newly-arrived  troops  were  paraded,  I  refused  to  march 
with  them,  and  Captain  Wilford  (son  of  the  Honourable  T.  .M.  Wil- 
ford)  peremptorily  ordered  some  half-dozen  men  to  carry  me  on  to  the 
parade  ground.  When  they  got  me  to  the  parade  ground  I  merely  sat 
down,  and  the  order  was  then  given  by  Wilford  to  take  me  away  to 
the  guard-rooni.  At  the  guard-room  1  was  told  that  after  dinner  I 
would  be  fully  dre.'^sed  and  be  taken  down  to  the  parade  ground  for 
Commanding  Officer's  inspection.  1  said  in  that  case  there  would  be 
someone  with  me,  because  I  would  not  walk  down  there,  neither  would 
I  carry  the  equipment.  Eventually  1  was  carried  down  by  the  mili- 
tary police.  They  had  put  the  pack  on  me,  and  I  just  sat  down,  using 
the  pack  for  a  support  uiuil  the  rest  of  the  draft  had  been  inspected 
by  Colonel  Mitchell.  The  Colonel  then  walked  over  to  where  I  was 
with  the  police,  atul  ordered  the  removal  of  the  pack,  and  also  in- 
structed that  1  was  to  be  taken  to  his  office  as  he  wanted  to  talk  to 
me.  In  his  oflice  he  asked  me  to  explain  my  altitude.  I  told  him  I 
was   an   anli-iuilitarist   deported   from   .New   Zealand,   and   that   I  would 


ARMAGEDDON   OR   CALVARY. 

undertake  no  military  service  whatever.  He  endeavoured  to  persuade 
me  to  change  my  mind,  and  in  doing  so  was  very  fair  and  reasonable. 
He  explained  that,  for  the  time  being,  I  was  under  his  charge,  and 
that  while  I  was  there  I  would  not  be  interfered  with;  but,  he  said, 
if  he  received  instructions  from  the  General  to  send  me  up  the 
line  he  would  have  to  obey,  and  if  I  refused  duty  when  there  I  would 
be  liable  to  be  courtmartialled  and  shot. 

I  might  mention  that  on  one  occasion  a  military  officer  of  high 
rank,  while  endeavouring  to  persuade  me  to  undertake  military  ser- 
vice, showed  me  what  purported  to  be  a  list  of  soldiers  who  had  been 
courtmartialled  and  some  of  whom  had  been  shot  for  refusing  to 
obey  orders. 

For  three  weeks  I  remained  in  the  guard-room.  At  the  end  of 
the  first  fortnight  I  was  again  taken  before  Colonel  Mitchell,  who 
told  me,  he  wanted  to  save  me  years  of  imprisonment,  and  offered  me 
light  work  in  the  garden.  I  told  him  I  would  scorn  to  take  any 
light  job  and  thus  be  the  means  of  sending  the  man  already  in  thai 
job  where  I  was  not  prepared  to  go  myself.  A  week  later  I  wa» 
taken  out  of  the  "clink"  and  placed  in  a  tent  with  the  mess  orderlies, 
and  was  told  I  would  not  be  expected  to  work,  but  could  knock 
about  the  camp.  In  this  way  I  filled  in  a  month,  and  then  was  ap- 
proached and  told  I  had  to  "go  througn  gas."  I  refused  to  go,  and 
was  carried  to  the  gas  hut  in  a  hand  cart.  A  gas  mask  was  placed 
on  me,  and  I  was  taken  into  the  gas  hut  by  two  men  with  gas  masks 
on.  I  immediately  pulled  down  the  top  of  my  mask.  It  was  placed 
on  me  again,  and  I  again  tore  it  down;  whereupon  I  was  pulled  out- 
side and  let  go. 

That  night  while  in  bed  I  was  told  I  was  to  proceed  "up  the  line" 
in  the  morning  with  a  draft,  and  was  asked  if  I  would  walk  to  the 
station.  I  replied:  "Yes,  conditionally."  They  asked  what  were  the 
conditions,  and  I  told  them:  "The  conditions  are  that  there  is  no  rifle 
or  hostile  equipment  to  carry."  Next  morning  when  I  got  up  I  found 
outside  the  hut  and  pack,  rifle  and  equipment,  also  a  hand  cart  and 
fatigue  parly.  They  placed  the  pack  on  my  shoulders  and  I  sat  down. 
I  was  then  forcibly  placed  on  the  hand  cart  and  taken  to  the  railway 
station,  and  there  put  on  the  train  for  Popperinghe,  where  we  landed 
considerably  after  dark  that  night.  I  left  the  railway  truck  and 
walked  up  to  the  camp,  leaving  behind  in  the  train  the  rifle  and  other 
equipment.  Next  morning  when  I  arose  there  were  orders  to  proceed 
to  Scottish  lines.  In  the  meantime  my  equipment  had  been  brought 
from  the  station  in  the  waggon  sent  for  the  officers'  luggage  and 
stores,  etc.  The  pack  was  again  put  on  me,  and  I  refused  to  walk  with 
it.  1  was  then  taken  by  the  feet,  and  dragged  head  downwards  some 
fifty  yards  to  a  tent.  I  was  sent  from  here  under  escort  to  the 
Scottish  Lines,  where  I  was  again  placed  in  the  guard-room.  The 
n.c.o.  here  was  a  coloured  man,  and  he  came  and  told  me  I  had  to 
go  out  and  parade  that  afternoon.      I  told  him  I  was  not  going.      The 

c, ' 


MARK   HRKUiS. 

li.c.o.  said:  "If  I  can't  take  you  out  any  other  way,  I'll  take  you  on 
the  point  of  the  guards'  bayonets."  I  did  not  go  out  on  parade,  how- 
ever. 

I  was  next  interviewed  by  Colonel  Blair,  who  asked  mo  if  I  had 
a  trade,  and  offered  to  give  me  any  work  about  the  camp  for  which 
I  was  fitted.  I  told  him  I  was  not  taking  on  any  military 
work  whatever.  I  was  then  sent  up  in  charge  of  a  non-commissioned 
officer  to  the  travelling  cookers  and  ordered  to  peel  potatoes.  I  again 
refused,  and  was  duly  charged  with  having  disobeyed  a  lawful  com- 
mand. For  this  I  was  sentenced  by  Colonel  Blair  to  twenty-eight 
days'  Field  Punishment  No.  1.  I  was  ordered  to  be  taken  from  the 
Scottish  Lines  to  the  compound  at  Oudredoum  to  serve  the  sentence. 
The  equipment  was  again  placed  on  me,  and,  of  course,  I  again  refused 
to  carry  it  and  was  dragged  out  of  the  "clink."  Finally,  when  J^hey 
recognised  the  hopelessness  of  getting  me  to  carry  the  pack,  they 
asked  me  if  I  would  go  without  it,  and  I  said  I  would.  Then  the 
pack  was  taken  off,  and  we  proceeded  to  the  compound — about  three 
or  four  miles  away.  Arriving  there,  the  police  in  charge  were  told 
I  was  a  conscientious  objector,  and  wouldn't  perform  either  military 

service   or    work.       One   of   the   military   said:    "We'll    b y   well 

soon  make  you  work."  I  said:  "I  don't  think  you  will."  He  Im- 
mediately ordered  me  to  "grab  a  banjo"  and  go  over  and  help  fill 
sand  bags.  These  sand  bags  were  used  to  put  around  the  bivouac  to 
protect  it  from  German  bombs  and  shells.  Refusing  to  obey,  I  was 
dragged  over  to  one  of  the  posts  erected  for  the  purpose,  and  was 
fastened  to  the  post.  I  was,  in  fact,  handcuffed  to  the  post  with  my 
hands  dragged  round  behind  me,  and  my  feet  were  also  lashed  to  it 
with  a  rope.  This  was  early  in  December,  which  is  practically  mid- 
winter in  France.  Needless  to  say,  the  cold  was  intense,  and  I  suf- 
fered agonies  during  the  hours  I  was  left  in  this  position.  I  remained 
tied  up  until  dinner  time,  when  I  was  released  for  the  meal.  After 
dinner  I  was  tied  up  to  the  post  again  in  the  same  way  and  left  for 
at  least  two  hours.  This  treatment  was  repeated  for  three  days; 
then  I  was  ordered  to  go  to  the  compound  cook-house  and  help  the 
cook.  Again  I  refused  to  obey  and  was  taken  up  before  the  A.P..M. 
(chief  officer  of  the  military  police),  and  was  charged  with  refusing 
to  work  in  the  compound.  He  said:  "I  don't  know  what  to  do  with 
you,  but  I  think  a  long  spell  in  a  military  jail  would  be  a  good 
remedy  for  you."  I  replied:  "I  don't  think  much  of  your  remedy.  No 
matter  where  you  put  me  I  will  be  just  the  same."  He  sentenced  me 
to  three  days'  confinement  in  the  punishment  cell.  After  I  had  served 
this  scnience,  1  was  ordered  to  do  pack  drill  and  refused.  They 
then  charged  me  with  disobeying  a  lawful  command,  and  got  ready 
for  a  courtmartlal. 

That  afternoon  or  the  following  day  General  Russell  came  to  the 
compound,  and  ordered  me  to  be  taken  out  to  see  him.  When  I  met 
him  he  took  me  aside,  and,  with  Colonel  Blair  only  present,  he  told 
3  65 


ARMAGEDDON   OR   CALVARY. 

me  that  they  had  come  to  the  conclusion  that  I  was  honest  and 
sincere  in  my  attitude.  "If  you  were  in  Germany,"  he  said,  "they 
would  shoot  you.  But  we  are  not  going  to  do  that  here.  What's 
more,  we  are  not  going  to  use  German  methods  on  you.  I  am  going 
to  release  you  unconditionally,  and  send  you  up  to  the  stores  at  Cafe 
Belles  for  a  month.  You  will  go  up  there,  and  no  one  whatever  will 
interfere  with  you.  At  the  end.  of  the  month  I  will  see  you  again 
and  ascertain  if  you  have  changed  your  mind.  You  know,  Briggs,"  he 
concluded,  "you  are  fighting  for  freedom;  so  am  I.  But  I  use  different 
methods  from  you.  Your  methods  may  be  right,  or  they  may  be 
wrong.  Mine  may  be  right,  or  they  may  be  wrong.  I  didn't  hold 
the  same  ideas  when  I  was  your  age  as  I  hold  to-day."  I  went  to 
Cafe  Belles  and  was  there  for  a  month,  receiving  very  fair  treatment. 
Then  the  stores  were  shifted  to  another  district.  The  morning  after  I 
landed  there  I  was  taken  over  to  see  Brigadier-General  Hart,  and  he 
asked  me  what  General  Russell  had  said  when  he  released  me  from  the 
compound.  I  told  him,  and  he  said:  "And  you  haven't  changed  your 
mind  yet?"  I  said:  "No,  and  not  likely  to."  He  said  he  wasn't 
going  to  try  to  make  me,  and  sent  me  back  to  the  stores,  where  I 
remained  until  some  weeks  later,  when  Colonel  Stuart  came  to 
succeed  General  Hart.  Stuart  sent  for  me,  and  said:  "Well,  Briggs, 
I  have  never  met  you  before,  but  I  have  heard  a  good  deal  about  you. 
Colonel  Mitchell  was  up  here  yesterday,  and  we  were  talking  your 
case  over.  You  won't  work,  and  I  don't  know  what  they  sent  you 
from  New  Zealand  for.  You  are  costing  the  New  Zealand  Government 
over  £1  for  every  day  you  are  in  France."  I  remarked  that  I  wasn't 
getting  much  of  it  anyhow.  He  asked  me  about  my  position  in  New 
Zealand  and  my  relatives,  and  also  wanted  to  know  if  I  was  prepared 
to  subscribe  towards  a  hospital  in  New  Zealand  when  I  got  back.  I 
refused  to  make  any  promise,  and  he  told  me  to  return  to  the  stores 
for  a  few  days,  when  I  should  hear  from  him. 

Not  long  after  this  time  General  Godley  visited  the  place,  and  his 
coming  was  followed  by  a  remarkable  change  in  my  treatment.  I 
could  not  help  associating  the  change  with  Godley's  influence,  for,  a 
few  days  after  his  appearance,  I  was  sent  for  by  Colonel  Stuart,  who, 
with  a  military  brusqueness  that  may  have  been  real  or  assumed, 
told  me  that  I  was  to  be  sent  1500  yards  behind  the  lines  to  work, 
and  that  if  I  didn't  work  I'd  take  the  consequences.  I  was  accordingly 
sent — along  with  Archie  Baxter  and  Kirwan,  accompanied  by  military 
police — to  a  camp  called  Belgian  Chateau. 

A  military  police  sergeant  was  in  charge  of  us.  The  first  night 
Baxter,  Kirwan  and  myself  were  left  together  in  a  hut.  Next  morn- 
ing I  was  taken  away,  and  a  captain  tried  to  induce  the  other  two  to 
go  to  work.  Then  he  came  and  told  me  they  had  consented  to  wor^i 
— which  was  not  true.  He  said  he  really  wanted  me  to  work,  and 
would  ,t;ive  me  a  written  statement  to  the  effect  that  I  wasn't  doing 
military  work.      I  refused  to  entertain  the  suggestion.      He  then  said: 

66 


MARK    RRTGGS. 

"You're  a  b y  rotter,  and  I'll  make  it   hot   for  you.      Yoii've  had  a 

pretty  rough  time,  but  you're  at  the  last  jump.  The  military  policy 
now  is  either  to  make  or  break  you."  I  retorted:  "You  might  break 
me,  but  you'll  never  make  me." 

I  was  kept  at  this  place  for  three  days  and  handed  bully  beef  and 
biscuits  and  water,  after  which  I  was  despatched  to  Otago  Camp 
(which  lay  about  a  mile  to  the  right  of  all  that  was  left  of  Ypres 
township).  On  my  arrival  there  I  was  first  put  in  a  hut,  and  was 
next  sent  for  by  a  captain,  who  said:  "You're  sent  up  here  to  work, 
Briggs,  and  work  you  will.  To-morrow  morning  you'll  put  on  equip- 
ment, take  a  rifle,  go  out  on  parade,  and  up  on  the  working  party 
the  same  as  any  other  man."  The  captain  put  plenty  of  military  bluff 
into  his  demeanour.  "If  the  Hun  comes  over,"  he  said,  "you'll  use 
the  rifle  the  same  as  any  other  man."  I  replied:  "Never  as  long  as 
you  live  will  I  carry  a  rifle  and  equipment  up  there."  He  said: 
"Well,  you'll  go  up  without  it  for  a  few  days;  then  you'll  go  up  with 
it  afterwards."  I  replied:  "I  won't  go  up  in  any  case."  He  said. 
"You'll  go  up  all  right."  I  said:  "I  may,  but  if  I  do  it  will,  be  in  an 
extraordinary  position." 

Next  morning  I  was  sitting  on  the  floor  of  the  hut  when  the  cap- 
tain came  in,  and  asked  if  I  was  going  up.  I  said:  "No."  He  kicked 
me  twice,  and  then  called  in  four  soldiers  and  told  them  to  take  me 
up.  "Get  him  there,"  he  said,  "no  matter  how,  so  long  as  you  get 
him  there."  The  soldiers  seized  me  and  carried  me  part  of  the  way, 
and  I  was  taken  the  rest  of  the  way  on  a  limber.  I  explained  my 
attitude  to  the  men  who  took  me,  and  they  were  friendly  enough. 
That  afternoon  I  went  back  to  Otago  Camp. 

On  the  following  morning  the  captain  came  in  again,  this  time 
bringing  the  military  police  sergeant  with  him.  The  captain  again 
asked  if  I  was  going  up,  and  I  replied,  "No."  The  police  sergeant 
then  grabbed  me  by  the  wrists  and  dragged  me  out  on  my  back  to  the 
parade  ground,  where  three  soldiers  were  waiting.  The  military 
policeman  asked:  "Is  there  any  rope  about?"  and  immediately  went 
to  look  for  it  himself.  He  found  a  long  piece  of  cable  wire,  and,  com- 
ing forward,  fastened  it  around  my  chest  immediately  under  my 
arms.  The  m.p.  and  the  soldiers  then  harnessed  themselves  to  the 
wire,  and  went  off  up  the  "duck-walk"  (a  footpath  constructed  of 
planks  with  battens  nailed  across  at  short  intervals,  to  obviate  the 
difflculty  of  the  soldiers  traversing  the  mud).  Along  this  track — as 
far  as  I  could  judge,  a  distance  of  about  a  mile — I  was  dragged  on  my 
back.  In  the  process  the  buttons  were  torn  off  my  clothes,  which 
were  dragged  away,  and  consequently  my  back  was  next  to  the 
"duck  walk."  The  result  was  that  I  sustained  a  huge  flesh  wound 
about  a  font  long  and  nine  inches  wide  on  the  right  back  hip  and 
thigh.  The  track  crossed  the  edge  of  an  old  shell  crater,  which  was 
full  of  water,  and  when  the  soldiers  reached  it  they  stopped.  The 
m.p.   asked:    "Are   you   going   to   walk   now"?       Because   if   you're   not. 


ARMAGEDDON   OR   CALVARY. 

you're  going  into  this  shell  hole."  I  replied  I  didn't  know  where  I  was 
going,  but  I  wasn't  going  to  walk  up  there,  anyway.  He  immediately 
threw  me  into  the  shell  hole,  and  dragged  me  through  the  water, 
and  along  the  ground  to  the  next  shell  crater,  and  by  means  of  the 
long  wire  again  pulled  me  through  the  water.  When  they  got  me 
out  on  to  the  bank  at  the  other  side,  they  just  picked  me  up  by  the 
shoulders  and  tipped  me  head  over  heels  back  into  the  water.  When 
I  came  upright  with  my  feet  at  the  bottom,  the  water  was  over  my 

shoulders.       The  m.p.  said:    "Drown  yourself  now,   you  b d,   if 

you  want  to  die  for  your  cause.  You  haven't  got  your  Paddy  W^ebbs  and 
your  Bob  Samples  to  look  after  you  now."  They  pulled  me  out,  and 
dragged  me  along  the  ground  to  yet  another  shell  hole,  and  they  pulled 
me  through  this  in  the  same  way.  Aff^r  which  I  was  dragged  another 
hundred  yards  or  so,  when  they  stopped,  and  the  m.p.  asked  me  if  they 
took  me  back  to  camp  and  gave  me  a  change  of  clothes  over  a  fire 
would  I  walk  up  afterwards. 

By  this  time  I  was  absolutely  exhausted,  and  was  shaking  all  over 
as  the  result  of  shock  to  the  system.  I  replied:  "I'll  never  walk  up 
there  as  long  as  I  draw  breath."  The  sergeant  then  asked  if  I  would 
walk  back  to  the  camp,  and  I  replied  that  I  would.  I  made  an  attempt 
to  get  up,  but  the  task  was  impossible.  Two  of  the  soldiers,  seeing 
that  I  was  incapable  of  walking,  lifted  me  with  my  arms  over  their 
shoulders,  and  in  this  way  they  carried  me  along  with  my  feet  drag- 
ging. Half  way  along  I  had  to  ask  to  be  put  down,  because  I  was 
suffering  unendurably  from  the  effects  of  my  treatment,  and  also 
from  the  manner  in  which  I  was  being  got  along.     The  m.p.  replied: 

"Keep  the  b d  going."     Eventually  they  got  me  to  the  camp,  and 

put  me  back  in  the  hut  from  which  I  had  been  taken  in  the  morning. 
They  divested  me  of  my  clothing — which  was  all  wet  and  muddy,  and 
which  I  was  not  permitted  to  see  again — and  gave  me  a  rough  rub 
over  with  a  dry  towel,  and  then  put  a  fresh  shirt  and  pants  on  me, 
after  which  they  covered  me  with  blankets,  placing  a  couple  of  mat- 
tresses on  top  of  the  blankets.  This  apparently  was  to  get  warmth 
into  ray  body.  There  was  only  one  thickness  of  blanket  under  me, 
however.  They  left  me  for  about  an  hour  and  a  half,  when  a  non- 
commissioned officer  brought  me  a  drink  of  tea,  and  asked  me  if  I 
intended  to  put  my  name  down  for  sick  parade.  I  replied:  "No,  I 
will  not  parade  before  any  military  doctor."  He  said  he  would  bring 
a  doctor  to  see  me,  as  I  was  not  fit  to  be  left  there.  The  m.p.  visited  me 
after  the  corporal  had  gone,  and  asked:  "Will  you  be  ready  for  a  re- 
petition of  that  treatment  after  dinner?"     I  replied:  "If  necessary." 

Tiic  soldiers  arrived  back  about  2.30  in  the  afternoon,  and  when 
they  saw  me  on  the  floor  covered  with  mattresses  and  blankets,  they 
asked:  "What's  wrong,  digger?"  I  replied:  "They  knocked  me  about 
a  bit  this  morning."  One  of  the  men  who  had  taken  part  in  dragging 
me  (and  who  l)elonged  to  the  hut)  told  the  others  just  what  had 
happened.     They  asked  him  why  he  had  done  it.     He  replied:     "I  had 

68 


MARK  liKlGGS. 

taken  the  oath  as  a  soldier,  and  was  threatened  with  courtmartial  if 
I  refused  to  do  it,  and  I  had  also  been  told  that  the  extreme  penalty 
was  death  for  refusing  duty  on  the  battlefield,  and  I  wasn't  the  bit  of 
stuff  to  refuse."  The  soldiers  expressed  intense  indignation  about  the 
action  of  the  m.p.,  and  threatened  that  they  would  take  his  life.  The 
m.p.  kept  out  of  the  way  that  evening.  Next  morning  when  he  was 
crossing  the  parade  ground  the  camp  cooks  (nine  or  ten  in  number) 
came  out  and  counted  him  out.  I  could  hear  the,  "One,  two,"  etc., 
and  the  medical  orderly  told  me  what  was  happening. 

The  doctor  came  about  four  in  the  afternoon  of  the  day  on  which 
I  was  injured.  He  came  into  the  hut  with  a  medical  orderly,  re- 
moved the  mattresses  and  blankets,  and  also  removed  my  clothing 
sufficiently  to  permit  him  to  see  my  back.  When  he  saw  the  extent 
of  my  injuries  he  uttered  an  exclamation  of  surprise  and  anger,  and 
told  two  men  in  the  hut  to  get  a  stretcher  and  take  me  to  the  R.A.P. 
hut.  They  removed  me  there,  and  the  doctor  at  once  examined  me, 
and  ordered  my  back  to  be  bathed  with  warm  water.  He  told  them: 
"Get  as  much  of  the  dirt  out  of  his  back  as  you  can.  You  won't  get 
it  all  out  because  it  it  ground  right  into  the  flesh.  You  will  have  to 
dress  his  back  and  send  him  right  away  to  the  hospital." 

The  doctor  then  went  away,  leaving  the  orderly  to  carry  out  his 
Instructions.  He  returned  about  half  an  hour  later,  and  a  bed  was 
made  up  on  a  stretcher  for  me  that  evening.  I  was  not,  however,  taken 
to  the  hospital.  Next  day  a  bunk  was  brought  in,  and  I  was  placed 
in  this,  and  so  remained  for  two  weeks.  During  the  first  week  I 
suffered  indescribable  agony;  on  certain  nights  I  did  not  sleep  at  all 
because  of  the  burning  sensation  of  the  flesh  wound.  The  only  time  I 
left  my  bed  was  to  get  out  to  the  latrines;  it  was  with  the  utmost 
pain  and  difficulty  that  I  could  move  about,  and  whenever  I  left  the 
bed  I  returned  exhausted.  By  the  end  of  the  fortnight  I  could  get 
out  for  half-an-hour  at  a  time,  when  I  would  saunter  slowly  up  and 
down  the  "duck  walk"  and  then  return  to  bed. 

The  hut  I  was  in  was  right  in  the  line  of  fire.  Shells  flow  over  the 
camp  and  lodged  a  mile  away. 

In  due  time  orders  came  to  move  camp  from  Ypres  sector  to  th2 
Soniine.  This  meant  the  transfer  of  all  the  soldiers.  Two  miles  from 
the  Otago  Camp  was  a  light  railway  used  to  convey  the  troops,  and 
the  doctor  asked  me  if  I  could  walk  this  distance.  1  agreed  to  make 
the  attempt,  and  succeeded  with  great  difficulty.  1  was  taken  by  rail 
to  near  Abele.  When  1  reached  this  rest  camp,  tlu  si  i  ^eant-major 
asked  me  what  was  the  matter  with  me.  I  replied  iliat  1  didn't  feel 
too  good.      He  said:   "Vou  look  b y  near  dead." 

Here  I  met  Archie  Baxter,  who  had  come  down  on  the  same  train. 
The  medical  hut  equipim-nr  failed  to  arrive,  and  I  found  myself  with- 
out blankets  that  ni.uhi.     Archie  Baxter  offertni  nio  one  of  his. 

1  was  alonii  with  Archie  Baxter  next  morninti  when  a  captain 
came    in   and   ordered    Baxter   out    on   parade    with   his   full    pack   up. 

69 


ARMAGEDDON   OR   CALVARY. 

Baxter  refused  to  obey,  whereupon  the  captain  used  unprintable 
language  and  attacked  Baxter,  striking  him  with  his  fists  and  knock- 
ing him  down,  and  then  kicked  him  while  on  the  ground.  The  oflScer 
next  lifted  him  from  the  floor  and  again  struck  him,  knocking  him 
down  again.  Following  on  this  incident,  Baxter  was  taken  away  to 
the  Somme.  This  attack  by  the  officer  happened  after  Baxter's  letter 
to  his  parents  was  written,  and  before  he  was  placed  in  the  mental 
hospital.     That  was  the  last  I  saw  of  Archie  Baxter. 

After  that  I  was  sent  to  Abele  for  medical  treatment,  and,  on  my 
arrival,  the  doctor  was  sent  for,  and  saw  me  at  the  medical  hut.  He 
ordered  me  to  report  there  next  morning — which  I  did.  Every  morn- 
ing thereafter  I  had  my  back  dressed  at  the  medical  hut.  I  was 
kept  here  for  about  a  month,  and  during  that  time  was  twice  sent 
before  Medical  Boards.  At  Abele  I  found  Captain  Mitchell  in  charge. 
At  this  time  I  was  bent  double,  and  couldn't  straighten  myself. 
Colonel  Mitchell  had  me  brought  before  him,  and  said:  "They  knocked 
you  about  at  Ypres?"  I  replied:  "Yes,  a  bit."  He  answered:  "Yes,  I 
think  a  good  bit  by  the  look  of  you."  He  remarked  that  I  would  not 
be  well  for  a  good  while  yet,  and  then  asked  me  what  I  intended  to 
do  when  I  got  right  again.  I  answered:  "Carry  on  the  same  as 
usual."  He  suggested  that  I  was  foolish,  and  asked  if  I  didn't  thinlc 
I  would  be  better  doing  some  light  job  instead  of  "getting  up  against 
it."     I  replied  that  I  couldn't  help  that. 

Here  I  learned  for  the  first  time  that  Ballantyne,  Little  and  Baxter 
had  each  been  sentenced  to  five  years'  imprisonment  with  hard  labour, 
and  that  their  sentences  had  been  commuted  to  two  years.  I  also 
learned  that  Archie  Baxter  was  taken  to  the  Somme  without  Colonel 
Mitchell's  knowledge.  Had  the  Colonel  known  what  was  being  done  I 
am  certain  he  would  have  tried  to  prevent  it. 

I  was  next  returned  to  Etaples  with  a  few  others  for  the  Final 
Medical  Board.  On  the  paper  sent  down  with  me  my  complaint  was 
set  down  as  a  form  of  rheumatism.  I  went  before  the  Board,  and 
Dr.  Marks  said  they  would  treat  me  for  my  complaint  and  patch  me 
up  for  a  Base  job.  I  told  him:  "I  wouldn't  do  a  Base  job  when  I 
was  fit  and  well,  and  I  am  sure  I  am  not  going  to  do  it  now."  He 
then  said  they  would  give  me  treatment  and  see  what  they  could  do 
for  me.  After  this  I  was  taken  before  Major  Bowerbank,  who  asked 
me  what  I  had  been  doing  while  I  was  up  the  line.  I  told  him  "No- 
thing." He  then  asked  me  how  I  got  into  the  condition  I  was  In, 
and  I  told  him  of  the  treatment  I  had  received  at  Ypres  six  weeks 
earlier,  and  showed  him  the  scar  of  the  flesh  wound  on  ray  back. 

T  was  under  medical  treatment  at  Etaples  for  three  weeks,  at  the 
end  of  which  time  they  told  me  that  they  could  do  nothing  more  for 
me — that  rest  was  the  only  thing  that  would  do  me  any  good.  By 
the  Medical  Board  I  was  classed  C2,  P.B.  3 — which  meant  the  lowest 
category  in  which  they  could  place  me  to  keep  me  in  either  France  or 
ICngland.       I    remained   practically   crawling   around    the   camp   for   a 

70 


MAKK  BRIGGS. 

fortnight;  and  then,  when  coming  out  of  the  cookhouse  with  Harland 
one  night,  a  non-commissioned  officer  said  to  me:  "Be  here  at  half- 
past  four;  they  have  you  on  a  P.B.  draft  for  up  the  line  again."  I 
insisted  on  being  taken  before  a  doctor,  and  was  taken  to  the  medical 
hut,  where  I  saw  Major  Bowerbank.  He  asked  me  what  was  wrong, 
and  I  told  him  that  I  had  just  been  told  that  I  was  to  proceed  up  the 
line  with  a  draft.  I  asked  him  to  say  whether  I  was  fit  to  even  walk 
to  the  station  without  a  pack.  The  pack  and  rifle  were  already  done 
up  waiting  for  me.  The  Major  told  me  to  go  back  to  my  tent;  and  I 
heard  no  more  about  being  sent  up  the  line. 

I  was  next  sent  along  to  Chaplain-Captain  Green  (Salvation  Army), 
who  wanted  to  put  me  on  washing  down  the  inside  of  the  Salvation 
Army  hut.  I  told  him  that  if  there  was  any  work  attached  to  it  "it 
was  a  wash-out,"  as  I  would  refuse  to  do  any  military  work.  Green 
argued  that  it  would  not  be  military  work.  I  pointed  out  that  men 
paid  five  shillings  a  day  by  the  military  were  already  doing  it.  In 
the  end,  the  Salvation  Army  officer  called  me  into  his  room,  and 
said:  "I  can't  understand  you  fellows."  I  said:  "I  am  very  well 
aware  of  that;  otherwise  you  wouldn't  be  in  the  position  you're  in 
now."  He  began  to  show  signs  of  anger,  and  declared  that  75  per 
cent  of  the  Conscientious  Objectors  were  shirkers  and  wasters,  but 
added  that  he  believed  there  were  a  few  who  were  genuine,  and  furthei' 
conceded  that  he  thought  I  was  one  of  the  genuine  Conscientious  Ob- 
jectors, because  of  what  I  had  gone  through  for  the  sake  of  my  prin- 
ciples. When  he  found  I  wouldn't  work  he  told  me  to  report  back  to 
the  orderly  room  and  tell  them  I  wouldn't  do  it.  I  didn't  bother 
reporting  back — I  was  aware  that  when  the  order  was  given  it  was 
known  that  I  would  not  obey  it. 

I  was  next  sent  for  by  Major  Bowerbank,  who,  as  soon  as  I  en- 
tered the  medical  hut,  asked  what  work  I  could  do.  I  replied  I  could 
do  no  military  work  whatever,  and  very  little  of  any  other,  even  if  I 
wi.shed  to.  He  said  he  knew  that.  "I  would  send  you  home  to- 
morrow, if  I  had  my  way,"  he  told  me;  "but  I  haven't  the  power  to 
do  it."  This  notwithstanding  that  he  was  President  of  the  Final 
.Medical  Board.  "You  have  cither  to  do  a  Base  job  or  go  up  the  line 
auain."  he  added.  I  replied:  "There  is  one  thing  certain.  I  won't 
do  a  Base  jot);  and  if  the  other  is  the  only  alternative  it  will  be  up 
tlio  line."  He  replifd:  "All  ri^ht.  then,"  and  1  returned  to  the  hut. 
He  then  sent  Harland  to  asl<  nio  if  I  would  do  certain  work  at  the 
Y.M.C.A.  hut.  I  replied,  ".\o,"  and  Harland  went  l)ack  and  told  him 
I  wouldn't  do  the  jol).  Harland  told  me  later  that  the  .Major  said  he 
might  have  known  from  what  I  had  said  previously  that  I  wouldn't 
do  the  work.  Harland  also  told  nie  that  Bowerbank  added:  "I  didn't 
wait  for  you  to  come  hark,  but  went  over  to  see  the  Commanding 
Ofhcer  (Major  Dovey).  and  we  have  decided  to  leave  Briggs's  case 
until  we  can  see  General  Richardson.  He  is  practically  a  C2  man, 
but.  so  far,  he  has  done  no  military   work.       If  he  took  on  a  job  in 

71 


ARMAGEDDON    OR    CALVARY. 

camp  and  broke  down  on  it  I  could  send  him  back."  A  few  days 
later  Harland  told  me  that  Major  Bowerbank  had  seen  General 
Richardson,  and  that  I  was  to  be  sent  to  England  in  a  fortnight  or 
ttir6e  weeks"  time. 

While  I  was  waiting  for  the  order  to  proceed  to  England,  Mr. 
Massey  and  Sir  Joseph  Ward  visited  Etaples,  and  I  heard  no  more 
about  the  trip  to  England;  but,  a  little  later,  a  non-commissioneJ 
officer  came  to  me  while  I  was  lying  in  bed,  and  told  me:  "They 
have  you  down  on  a  gas  stunt  to-day,  Briggs;  I  don't  know  how  you 
will  get  on."  This  meant  walking  about  six  miles  in  all,  and  under- 
going a  gas  test.  I  replied:  "I  know  how  I  will  get  on.  In  the  first 
place,  I'm  not  fit  to  go.  In  the  second  place,  I'm  not  going;  and  if 
the  military  authorities  insist  on  me  going  they'll  have  to  drag  me 
every  inch  of  the  way,  because  I  will  not  try  to  walk.  By  what  I  can 
see  of  them,  they  want  the  last  drop  of  blood  out  of  a  man  before 
they  will  be  satisfied,  and  if  they  do,  let  them  take  it."  I  heard  no 
more  about  the  "gas  stunt." 

I  was  next  sent  for  by  Colonel  McKenzie  (who  had  now  succeeded 
Major  Dovey).  He  asked  me:  "What  are  you  doing  in  camp?"  I 
replied:  "Nothing."  He  said:  "You've  been  here  five  months,  haven  t 
you?"  I  replied:  "Yes,  roughly  speaking."  He  said:  "What  do  you 
think  of  yourself  drawing  Government  pay  and  eating  Government 
food  and  doing  nothing  for  it?"  I  said:  "Government  pay?  I  never 
drew  a  sixpence  from  the  Army  in  my  life."  He  said:  "Well,  you 
eat  the  food.  Will  you  be  prepared  to  pay  for  that  when  you  get 
back  to  New  Zealand?"  I  replied:  "No;  I  want  you  to  understand  I 
was  dragged  from  New  Zealand  and  deported.  I  consider  the  least 
they  can  do  is  to  feed  me  while  I  am  away — and  they've  done  that 
very  poorly  at  times."  The  Colonel  then  said:  "Oh,  well,  I  am  not 
going  to  discuss  your  ideas.  I  am  here  to  decide  whether  you  are 
fit  to  go  up  the  ditches  or  not."  He  added  that  he  was  satisfied  that 
I  was  not  fit  to  go  up  the  line,  and  urged  that  if  I  would  take  a  light 
job  in  camp  it  would  not  be  so  bad.  "But,"  he  said,  "you  won't 
work."  I  replied:  "No."  He  said:  "If  I  were  to  send  you  to  Blighty 
it  would  be  the  same?"  I  said:  "Exactly."  He  then  asked  me  if  he 
sent  me  back  to  New  Zealand,  what  was  the  first  thing  I'd  do  on 
arrival  there.  I  told  him  that  I'd  first  have  a  rest.  He  then  wanted 
to  know  what  was  the  first  thing  I'd  do  after  I  had  had  a  rest.  I 
.^aid:   "Supervise  ray  own  business." 

The  following  week  I  saw  Colonel  Mitchell,  who  said  it  was  time 
I  was  sent  back  to  England,  and  that  he  would  see  that  I  was  sent 
back.  A  week  later  I  was  sent  with  a  draft  from  France  to  Torquay. 
I  arrived  at  Torquay  on  Sunday,  and  on  Monday  morning  I  was  taken 
to  headquarters,  when  an  officer  asked  me  for  my  name  and  number. 
I  gave  him  my  name,  and  told  him  I  hadn't  got  a  number.  He  de- 
manded to  see  my  pay-book,  and  I  told  him  I  had  none.  He  then 
asked  me  how  long  it  was  since  I  had  left  New  Zealand,  and  I  told 

72 


him  twelve  months  last  July.  He  then  asked  how  I  had  sot  on  for 
money,  and  I  replied  I  had  never  had  any  money  from  the  military. 

He  said:   "I  think  you  are  telling  a  pack  of  b y  lies."       He  then 

instructed  the  n.c.o.  to  write  to  the  Records  Office  in  I^ondon,  and 
inform  them  that  they  had  a  man  there  who  told  them  he  had  left 
New  Zealand  twelve  months  last  July  'and  had  never  had  any  money 
off  them  or  a  pay-book.  Addressing  me  he  said:  "This  is  no  place  for 
you.     We'll  d n  soon  have  you  out  of  this." 

I  was  then  sent  back  to  Wellington  District  Camp,  at  Granville 
Mansions,  and  remained  there  ten  days  in  the  house  and  garden,  and 
never  went  outside.  While  in  the  garden  there  I  was  ordered  by  a 
Lieutenant  Tipping  to  go  on  parade,  and  refusing,  was  sent  by  Tip- 
ping's  orders  to  the  guard-room.  Two  days  after  I  was  taken  before  a 
.Major  and  charged  with  refusing  to  go  on  parade.  '  I  was  asked  if  I 
still  refused  to  go  on  parade,  and  replied:  "Yes."  I  was  then  re- 
manded, and  afterwards  told  by  the  m.p.  that  I  had  been  remanded  for 
a  "summary  of  evidence."  I  was  held  in  the  guard-room  for  anothor 
ten  days  or  so,  when  General  Richardson  came  in  with  Major  Kaye 
one  evening  about  seven.  The  General  asked  me  what  I  was  doing 
in  there,  and  I  replied  that  I  was  a  Conscientious  Objector.  He 
asked  me  what  I  was  there  for,  and  I  told  him  for  refusing  to  go  on 
parade.  He  questioned  me  about  my  experiences  in  France,  and  1 
gave  him  in  detail  the  account  of  what  I  had  undergone.  "Join  the 
medical  corps,"  he  said,  "and  I'll  wash  your  crimes  out."  I  replied: 
"No;  I'll  join  nothing  in  this  outfit."  It  is  needless  for  me  to  add 
that  I  didn't  concede  that  I  had  any  "crimes"  that  needed  washing 
out.  It  was  rather  the  other  way  about  as  between  the  military  and 
myself. 

The  next  day  the  m.p.  had  instructions  to  take  me  to  Major  Kaye 
(Commanding  Officer  of  Torquay),  who  said  he  wished  to  talk  to  me  as 
man  to  man,  not  as  officer  to  man.  He  questioned  me  about  my 
religious  beliefs,  and  I  assured  him  that  although  I  had  been  brought 
up  a  Wesleyan  Methodist,  I  did  not  base  my  objection  to  military  ser- 
vice on  religious  grounds.  I  explained  that  I  was  an  anti-militarist. 
He  asked  me  what  would  have  happened  if  everybody  had  been  like 
me  and  German  Militarism  had  been  allowed  to  run  over  us.  I  re- 
plied that  if  everybody  had  been  like  me  there  would  have  been  no 
■war.  I  added  that  I  reckoned  that  I  personally  had  had  German 
.Militarism  over  me  from  the  first  day  the  red-caps  put  a  band  on  me 
in  New  Zealand.  I  pointed  out  to  him  that  one  of  the  strongest 
arguments  used  in  securing  volunteers  from  New  Zealand  was  that 
their  mission  was  to  end  German  .Militarism,  but.  unfortunately  (I 
told  him),  the  thing  they  asked  the  New  Zealand  soldiers  to  end 
in  Germany  was  the  very  thing  they  were  establishing  behind  the 
soldiers'  backs  in  New  Zealand.  He  finished  up  by  saying  that  my 
ideals  wore  all  right,  but  that  they  were  impracticable. 

Eventuallv  I  was  sent  to  a  farm  at  Mortonhamstead,  and  remained 


ARMAGEDDON   OR   CALVARY. 

there  for  a  month.  I  was  then  sent  back  to  Torquay  for  further 
medical  treatment,  and,  after  a  week  there,  was  recommended  to  be 
returned  to  New  Zealand  at  the  first  opportunity. 

About  three  weeks  after  my  return  to  Torquay  I  was  placed  on 
board  the  Ruapeha,  and  made  the  return  trip  to  New  Zealand  without 
incident  of  any  moment. 

On  my  arrivel  in  Wellington  Harbour,  I  refused  to  take  either 
money  or  discharge  when  we  were  lined  up  prior  to  disembarkation. 
I  "fell  out,"  and  was  called  back  by  a  non-commissioned  officer,  and 
taken  before  the  Commanding  Officer  of  the  boat  and  a  shore  officer, 
and  these  made  an  effort  to  persuade  me  to  take  the  discharge  papers. 
I  refused,  basing  my  refusal  on  the  fact  that  I  had  never  been  a 
soldier,  and,  therefore,  needed  neither  money  nor  discharge.  The 
officer  from  ashore  then  asked  the  boat  Commanding  Officer  if  he  had 
a  guard.  The  Commanding  Officer  said:  "No;  but  I  can  soon  get 
one."  The  shore  officer  then  said  to  me:  "We'll  have  to  put  you 
under  open  arrest."  I  said:  "If  that's  the  penalty  for  refusing  mili- 
tary pay  and  papers,  you'd  better  do  it,  because  I  have  no  intention 
of  taking  them."  I  was  then  told  to  consider  myself  under  open 
arrest,  and  as  I  walked  away  one  officer  said  to  the  other:  "We  can 
put  him  under  close  arrest  before  he  gets  to  the  wharf." 

Ah  ut  two  hours  later  I  was  told  that  the  Commanding  Officer  of 
the  boat  wanted  to  see  me,  and  when  I  got  down  the  Commanding 
Officer  took  me  to  Brigadier-General  Andrews,  who  had  come  on 
board.  When  I  went  into  the  room  General  Andrews  said:  "Well, 
Briggs,  there  seems  to  be  some  difficulty  in  disposing  of  you."  I 
said:  "None  as  far  as  I  am  concerned."  Andrews  then  asked  me: 
"Well,  what  was  the  trouble  this  morning?"  "Merely,"  I  replied, 
"that  they  offered  me  military  papers  and  money  and  a  discharge,  and 
I  wouldn't  take  them."  "Well,"  he  said,  "yours  is  a  peculiar  case. 
What  do  you  think  we  should  do  with  you  when  we  land  you  on  the 
wharf?"  I  said:  "I  don't  consider  you  should  do  anything  with  me." 
He  then  wanted  to  know  how  I  would  get  on  for  money  and  my  return 
ticket  to  Palmerston  North.  I  told  him  that  I  should  have  friends  to 
meet  me  on  the  wharf.  "If  we  put  you  on  the  wharf  without  your 
military  papers,"  he  said,  "you  will  be  liable  to  be  asked  for  them 
and  arrested  if  you  haven't  got  them.  Can  you  suggest  a  way  out  of 
the  difficulty?"  I  suggested  that  he  could  furnish  me  with  a  formal 
discharge  which  wouldn't  require  my  signature.  I  told  him  I  would 
sign  nothing.  He  then  said  to  the  Commanding  Officer  of  the  ship: 
"This  man  is  not  under  arrest,  is  he?"  and  the  Commanding  Officer 
.said,  '"So."  General  Andrews  then  said  to  me:  "All  right,  Briggs;; 
I'll  depend  on  your  word  of  honour  that  you  won't  go  ashore  until 
you've  seen  me.  C^ome  down  here  after  the  soldiers  have  gone  ashore 
and  I'll  fix  you  up." 

After  the  soldiers  had  gone  ashore,  I  went   below,  but  the  General 
wasn't  th<'re.      I  saw  another  officer,  and  he  advised  me  to  go  ashore 

74 


MARK  BRIGGS. 

and  return  in  the  morning.  I  left  the  ship  in  a  disreputable  old 
khaki  suit,  and  was  met  by  my  brother,  Mr.  and  Mrs.  Ballantyne,  Mr. 
Peter  Fraser,  M.P.,  Mrs.  Aitken,  Mr.  Jack  Hughes,  and  others.  I  put 
the  evening  in  with  my  friends  after  getting  into  decent  civilian 
clothes,  and  returned  to  the  boat  next  morning.  I  went  to  the  office 
and  saw  a  shore  officer,  who  exclaimed:  "It  didn't  take  you  long  to 
get  into  civvy  clothes!"  I  failed  to  see  General  Andrews,  but  one 
of  the  officers  answered  my  inquiries:  "Oh,  well,  you're  as  much  a 
civilian  now  as  ever  you  were.  Your  discharge  is  being  made  out 
and  will  be  posted  to  you."  Thereupon  I  left  the  boat,  and  in  due 
time  returned  to  my  friends  and  business  at  Palmerston  North. 

In  a  few  days  a  registered  letter  from  the  military,  addressed  to 
me,  arrived  at  the  Palmerston  North  Post  Office.  A  girl  clerk  clears 
the  P.O.  box  daily  for  my  firm,  but  for  this  letter  the  girl's  signature 
was  refused.  She  was  told  that  I  would  have  to  take  delivery  of  the 
letter  personally.  When  I  called  at  the  Post  Office,  I  was  asked  for 
my  regimental  number,  and  told  the  postmaster  I  had  no  number. 
"Then,"  he  said,  "this  letter  cannot  be  for  you."  I  had  made  up  my 
mind  not  to  give  the  military  authorities  my  signature,  and,  of  course, 
the  postal  people's  view  of  things  suited  me.  So  I  came  away,  and 
the  letter  is  still  at  the  Post  Office — if  it  has  not  been  returned  to  the 
Defence  Department. 

(Signed)   MARK  BRIGGS. 


XVI.—  ARCHIBALD  MeC.  L.  BAXTER. 

My  object  in  writing  this  statement  is  not  to  parade  my  opinions 
or  principles.  Neither  do  I  write  it  as  a  complaint  against  the  Army, 
for  I  believe  complaints,  as  a  rule,  do  little  good.  My  object  is  an 
honest  one.  I  wish  to  make  a  plain  statement  of  facts  which  may 
prove  of  some  value,  and  if  much  of  which  I  have  to  relate  discredits 
me  in  the  minds  of  some  people,  the  public  has  at  least  an  honest,  if 
incomplete,  statement  to  judge  from,  and  I  might  say  here  at  the 
outset,  that  I  have  nothing  to  conceal,  and,  from  my  point  of  view, 
nothing  to  be  ashamed  of.  I  have  often  been  asked,  "What  are  my 
objections  to  war?"  and  the  argument  of  the  "survival  of  the  fittest" 
has  often  been  used  in  support  of  military  methods.  I  have  wondered 
that  educated  men  can  be  so  illogical,  for  while  this  law  may  be 
natural  enough  throughout  the  animal  kingdom,  in  war  it  is  not  the 
"fittest"  who  survive,  but  a  great  many  of  the  world's  fittest  and  best 
men  are  slain,  while  a  still  greater  number  are  rendered  unfit.  I  am 
against  war  on  this  ground,  and  I  wonder  that  any  sane  person  who 
knows    the   de.strwction.   the   degradation,   the   misery,  and  the  sorrow 


ARMAGEDDON   OR   CALVARY. 

caused  by  war,  can  regard  it  as  anything  else  than  diabolical  in  the 
extreme.  Now  I  have  always  been  a  true  believer  in  law  and  order, 
and  as  a  citizen  I  have  regard  for  the  thoughts  and  opinions  of  my 
fellows,  and  also  for  their  feelings.  I  believe  that  a  man  should  seek 
to  bring  his  life  and  actions  into  agreement  with  his  truest  sense  of 
duty  towards  God  and  Man.  I  believe  that  the  Soul  of  Man  is  not, 
and  cannot  be,  subject  to  any  earthly  State,  for  no  earthly  State  is 
perfect.  For  this  the  military  authorities  designated  me  a  "Defiant 
Objector"  in  New  Zealand,  but  in  France  they  told  me  that  they  be- 
lieved me  sincere,  although  I  had  not  changed  my  opinions.  I  believe 
that  passive  resistance  to  evil  is  the  power  that  will  yet  conquer  the 
world,  and  I  believe  that  that  form  of  militarism  that  goes  on  the 
principle  that  Man  is  merely  the  property  of  Man,  will  find  that  there 
are  men  who  will  oppose  such  principles,  though  they  be  subjected  to 
the  most  barbarous  cruelties,  or  put  to  death,  or  shut  in  cells  and 
bound  with  all  the  chains  and  fetters  that  were  ever  forged  on  the 
anvils  of  Hell.  I  am  not  against  the  soldier;  the  troops  I  came  in 
contact  with  know  that.  I  judge  no  man  for  his  opinions.  I  have 
my  failings  like  other  men,  but  I  stand  for  Universal  Brotherhood. 
I  view  all  men  as  comrades  and  brothers  in  different  stages  of  moral, 
intellectual,  and  spiritual  development,  and  I  know  that  far  above  all 
earthly  States  is  to  be  found  the  awakened  Soul  of  Man  struggling 
onward  and  upward,  away  from  long  cherished  delusions  towards 
that  universal  harmony  which  to  know  in  its  fullness  would  be  perfect 
comprehension,  freedom,  and  love. 

I  was  arrested  at  my  home  in  Brighton  by  the  local  policeman  in 
company  with  another  officer.  I  had  not  received  notice  to  go  into 
camp,  and  had  just  returned  home  from  a  hard  season's  shearing.  The 
local  police  officer  said  he  had  come  to  see  me  on  business  relating 
to  farming  statistics,  and  I  walked  with  him  a  short  distance  from 
the  house,  where  his  friend  appeared,  and  I  was  informed  that  I  was 
under  arrest.  I  asked  for  permission  to  go  into  the  house  for  my 
clothes,  and  when  this  was  refused.  I  asked  the  officer  to  come  in 
with  me,  or  go  in  himself,  but  he  refused,  and  ordered  me  into  his 
cart.  My  mother  then  brought  out  my  hat  and  coat  and  I  was  driven 
off.  I  was  taken  to  the  Kensington  Drill  Hall,  and  from  there  was 
marched  down  to  the  Central  Battery  by  four  guards  with  fixed 
bayonets,  and  was  there  locked  in  a  cell.  Next  day  I  was  sent  to 
Trenthaiu  Camp,  and  was  there  charged  before  the  Camp  Comman- 
dant with  being  absent  without  leave.  The  case  against  me  was 
dismissorl,  but  I  was  not  set  at  liberty.  I  was  kept  a  prisoner  in 
company  with  William  Little,  my  brother  John,  and  some  others  in 
the  "clink."  After  a  few  days,  my  brother  Alex,  was  brought  in,  and 
we  wtre  then  sentenced  to  twenty-eight  days'  detention  for  refusing 
our  kit.s.  When  we  arrived  at  the  Detention  Barracks  at  Wellington, 
we  were  put  on  bread  and  water  for  three  days  for  refusing  to  take 

76 


ARCHIBALD  McC.  L.  BAXTER. 

off  our  civilian  clothes  and  change  into  denims.  We  were  afterwards 
charged  before  a  courtmartial  (and  got  three  months'  jail  for  the 
same  offence.  We  were  taken  back  to  Trenthain  when  our  time  was 
up,  and  were  sentenced  to  another  twenty-eight  days'  detention.  We 
were  sent  again  to  the  Wellington  Detention  Barracks,  where  we  were 
asked  if  we  intended  to  take  off  our  clothes  this  time.  We  replied 
that  we  did  not,  and  no  further  pressure  was  used.  We  were  locked 
In  our  cell  most  of  the  time  for  about  a  fortnight,  when  early  one 
morning  we  were  marched  out  by  about  a  dozen  military  police.  We 
were  put  on  board  a  transport,  and  when  we  were  put  into  the  guard- 
room on  board  we  met  ten  other  Objectors  who  had  been  put  on  board 
during  the  night.  I  had  met  most  of  these  men  in  jail,  and  they 
were  pleased  to  meet  us  again.  There  were  then  fourteen  of  us  in 
all.  The  thing  we  felt  most  at  the  time  was  not  being  allowed 
to  bid  our  friends  good-bye.  We  were  kept  in  that  guard-room,  and 
most  of  us  being  sick,  we  were  in  a  bad  way  for  some  time,  but  after- 
wards, by  the  Captain's  orders,  I  think,  we  were  taken  out  on  deck 
for  fresh  air,  and  were  also  given  a  chance  to  keep  our  quarters 
clean. 

Before  we  reached  Capetown  many  of  those  on  board  were  down 
with  measles,  and  about  twenty  men,  including  Albert  Sanderson,  my 
brother  John  and  myself,  were  put  ashore  at  this  port.  I  saw  no 
more  of  the  other  Objectors  till  I  met  some  of  them  in  France,  ex- 
cept Robert  Gray,  whom  I  met  at  Sling  Camp.  He  was  doing  gar- 
dening work  there  at  the  time.  Gray  told  me  that  he  and  his  com- 
rades had  been  stripped  of  their  clothes  a  few  days  after  their  ship 
left  Capetown.  He  said  that  their  clothes  were  thrown  overboard  and 
that  they  were  pulled  out  naked  and  had  had  the  hose  tuined  on  them. 
When  we  were  put  ashore  at  Capetown  I  was  sent  to  the  military 
hospital  at  Maitland  in  company  with  others,  my  brother  and  Sander- 
son being  sent  to  another  hospital. 

After  about  three  weeks  we  were  all  gathered  up  again  and  sent 
to  the  Castle  at  Capetown.  We  remained  there  for  some  weeks, 
and  no  men  could  have  been  more  friendly  than  the  troops  who  were 
with  us  there.  The  lieutenant  in  charge  was  a  New  Zcalander,  but 
had  not  been  in  Xew  Zealand  for  twenty  year.s.  He  told  me  that  all 
he  would  ask  oC  my  brother  and  I  was  to  an.-^wer  the  roll  call.  San- 
derson had  been  sentenced  to  a  term  of  imprisonnii'nt  in  Xew  Zea- 
land, and  as  his  time  had  not  yet  expired  he  was  stiit  to  a  military 
prison  in  Weinherii.  All  the  rest  of  us  were  sent  after  this  to  Simons- 
town.  My  brother  and  I  were  in  civilian  clothes  and  were  at  absolute 
freedom.  Our  stay  there  did  us  a  great  amount  of  good.  A  band 
of  us  used  to  go  out  each  day  (.xplorinu  the  coimtry.  and  we  saw  many 
interesting  things — things  that  were  new  to  us  in  plant  and  animal 
life.  I  was  sorry  that  Sanderson  was  confined  to  a  prison  cell  while 
we  roved  out  at  will,  through  scenes  of  the  most  wonderful  rugged 
beauty.      Altogether   we  spent   about    three   and   a   half  months  there. 


ARMAGEDDON   OR   CALVARY. 

and  if  we  had  any  wish  to  escape  from  the  army  we  had  nothing  to 
do  but  to  walk  away,  but  that  would  have  been  against  our  principles. 

My  brother,  Sanderson  and  I  left  Capetown  with  the  other  New 
Zealanders  on  a  passenger  ship,  the  Llanstephen  Castle.  There  were 
about  nine  hundred  negroes  on  board,  who  were  being  sent  out  by 
the  South  African  Government  to  work  behind  the  lines  in  France.  We 
had  a  good  enough  time  on  the  voyage  and  were  not  made  prisoners, 
but  had  complete  freedom.  Sanderson  became  ill,  and  was  so  far 
down  at  one  time  that  I  thought  he  would  never  reach  England.  No 
men  could  have  been  more  friendly  than  those  New  Zealanders  who 
were  w^ith  us  at  Capetown  and  on  the  voyage  to  England. 

When  we  arrived  at  Plymouth  we  were  lined  up  on  the  wharf,  and 
a  British  oflScer  came  along  and  asked,  "Who  are  these  men  in  civilian 
clothes?"  When  he  was  told  he  said  he  did  not  know  what  to  do 
about  us,  and  went  away  to  find  out.  When  he  came  back  he  sent  us 
along  with  the  other  men  to  Sling  Camp.  For  some  time  after  arriving 
at  Sling  Camp  I  was  at  liberty.  I  was  still  wearing  civilian  clothes, 
which  I  refused  to  give  up,  but  eventually  they  were  taken  away  from 
me  forcibly  and  I  was  then  dressed  in  uniform.  I  was  put  in  deten- 
tion for  refusing  orders,  and  each  day  I  was  taken  out  by  the  Military 
Police  for  exercise,  always  handcuffed,  with  my  hands  behind  my 
back.  I  was  also  handcuffed  in  the  same  way  while  in  my  cell.  It 
was  snowy  weather,  and  for  want  of  circulation  I  could  hardly  move 
a  limb.  I  was  suffering  from  neuralgia  and  protested  against  such 
treatment.  I  think  it  was  the  only  time  I  ever  did  complain  in  the 
Army.  The  Military  Police  said  it  was  the  adjutant's  orders,  but 
that  they  would  see  the  provost-sergeant.  The  latter  came  in  and 
took  the  handcuffs  off  and  told  me  to  come  out  into  the  guard-room 
and  have  a  warm  at  the  fire.  I  have  nothing  to  say  against  the  mili- 
tary police  at  Sling.  I  heard  the  adjutant's  orders,  which  were  that 
if  I  did  not  choose  to  promise  obedience  I  could  freeze." 

Almost  every  day  I  was  visited  by  oflBcers  and  sometimes  by  a 
chaplain.  They  argued  with  me  sometimes  for  hours  at  a  stretch. 
One  parson  told  me  that  he  was  very  much  interested  and  glad  that 
he  had  met  me.  He  had  heard  about  me,  and  had  evidently  ex- 
pected to  meet  a  crank  or  an  egotist,  who  had  no  regard  for  any 
law,  human  or  divine.  He  talked  with  me  for  a  long  time,  and  told 
me  that  he  agreed  with  me  on  most  points,  but  that  his  views  were 
not  .so  extreme.  He  offered  to  do  anything  in  his  power  for  me,  and 
promised  to  call  and  see  me  again. 

After  this,  the  colonel  and  the  adjutant  paid  me  another  visit, 
and  informed  me  that  I  was  being  sent  to  France  with  the  next  draft. 
I  was  glad  to  hear  this,  for  I  knew  that  my  comrades  were  there, 
and  I  hoped  to  meet  them  again.  They  told  me  that  if  I  went  along 
quietly  with  the  other  soldiers  I  would  be  all  right.  They  asked  me 
if  I  would  do  this,  and  I  replied  that  I  realised  that  I  was  in  their 
power,  and  that  they  could  send  me  wherever  they  wished. 

78 


ARCHIBALD  McC.  L.  BAXTER. 

When  the  draft  was  ready  to  start,  the  sergeant,  the  military 
police,  and  a  few  soldiers  who  knew  me  shook  hands  with  me,  and 
wished  me  the  best  of  luck.  They  asked  me  what  I  would  do  when 
I  reached  France,  and  I  replied:  "They  can  send  me  to  France,  they 
can  send  me  into  the  trenches  or  anywhere  they  like.  All  that  I 
can  conscientiously  do  I  will  do,  but  what  I  cannot  conscientiously 
do  I'll  refuse  to  do,  no  matter  what  the  consequences."  They  cheered, 
and  I  was  then  taken  out  and  attached  to  the  draft  and  sent  off. 

Next  day  I  arrived  at  Etaples,  and  there  met  Patton  and  Harland. 
Patton  told  me  he  had  been  in  a  compound  for  twenty-eight  days  for 
refusing  orders,  and  had  been  punched  by  a  guard  while  in  prison. 
He  had  been  on  No.  1  Field  Punishment.  At  the  time  of  which  I 
write  both  Patton  and  Harland  were  at  liberty,  and  I  remained  with 
them  about  two  days,  and  during  this  time  had  my  freedom. 

I  was  then  taken  before  Colonel  Mitchell.  He  said  that  I  was  to 
proceed  to  Abele  with  a  draft,  and  that  he  would  be  up  there  in  a 
few  days,  and  would  see  me  there. 

I  went  with  the  draft,  and  when  we  reached  Abele  I  was  put 
in  a  hut  with  the  other  troops,  and  in  the  morning  was  given  an  order, 
which  I  refused  to  obey.  I  was  then  left  for  a  few  days  until  Colonel 
Mitchell  arrived.  I  was  taken  before  him  several  times  for  about  a 
week.  He  said  he  did  not  wish  to  send  me  to  "clink,"  but  that  he  could 
not  leave  me  among  the  other  troops.  He  gave  me  into  the  charge 
of  the  military  police,  and  told  me  to  remain  with  the  police  for  the 
time  being.  I  stayed  with  the  police  In  their  quarters  for  some  time, 
and  was  allowed  a  certain  amount  of  freedom.  The  police  were  very 
friendly,  and  I  was -well  treated  by  them. 

Colonel  Mitchell  had  told  me  that  he  would  look  into  my  case, 
and  see  if  he  could  do  anything  for  me.  The  next  time  I  was  called 
before  him  he  told  me  that  he  had  done  all  in  his  power  for  me,  and 
that  if  I  did  not  obey  orders  he  could  not  do  other  than  treat  me  as 
any  other  soldier  who  disobeys;  that  I  was  regarded  as  a  soldier  by 
the  N.Z.  Government.  I  explained  my  attitude,  and  he  said  that  he 
very  much  regretted  to  have  to  punish  me,  but  if  I  did  not  obey  his 
hand  would  be  forced. 

I  was  then  taken  and  given  an  order,  which  I  refused.  I  was 
taken  before  him  again,  and  was  sentenced  to  twenty-eight  days'  No. 
1  Field  Punishment.  Next  day  I  was  taken  to  a  compound,  where  I 
received  orders  from  the  sergeant,  which  I  again  refused.  I  was 
then  reported  to  the  officer  in  charge,  who  told  me  that  he  would 
have  to  tie  me  up,  but  he  hated  to  have  to  do  this  to  any  man,  and 
was  not  doing  it  to  other  prisoners.  I  remained  there  for  about  a 
week,  but  was  not  tied  up.  An  officer  came  to  the  compound  and  had 
a  conversation  with  me.  and  said  that  I  should  not  be  permitted  to 
live.  I  was  then  taken  out  of  that  compound  and  sent  to  another 
called  Mud  Farm.  The  men  there  were  being  tied  up.  whether  they 
obeyed  orders  or  not.     This  compound  was  in  charge  of  a  lieutenant 

79 


ARMAGEDDON    OR    CALVARY. 

ot  the  Imperial  Forces  and  a  N.Z.  sergeant.  After  I  had  been  there 
for  a  few  days,  tied  up  three  hours  each- day,  Kirwan  was  brought  in 
under  escort  and  put  in  a  tent  in  the  same  enclosure  with  me.  There 
were  a  good  many  prisoners  there,  but  only  one  New  Zealander  beside 
Kirwan  and  myself.  Kirwan  had  been  sentenced  for  the  second  time 
to  twenty-eight  days'  No.  1  Field  Punishment  for  refusing  orders. 
While  doing  the  first  term  he  had  been  put  in  close  confinement  for 
a  time  on  biscuits  and  water.  While  we  were  there  we  received  the 
same  food  as  the  other  prisoners.  It  kept  our  body  and  soul  together. 
The  weather  became  very  cold  and  rough.  The  poles  on  which  we 
were  tied  were  in  a  very  exposed  place  by  the  roadside,  in  view  of 
the  passers-by.  The  other  prisoners  were  not  tied  up  in  all  weathers, 
but  Kirwan  and  I  were.  On  one  occasion  we  were  tied  there  in  a 
bitter  snowstorm.  I  was  too  numbed  to  feel  when  taken  off,  and 
suffered  much  from  the  effects. 

We  were  both  taken  from  this  place  back  to  Abele,  where  we 
were  again  taken  before  Colonel  Mitchell,  who  said  that  as  we  still 
refused  orders  there  was  no  alternative  but  to  send  us  up  the  lines, 
and  also  pointed  out  to  us  what  it  would  mean  if  we  refused  to  obey 
orders  under  fire.  He  told  me  that  he  thought  at  one  time  that  I 
might  change  my  mind,  and  I  replied  that  he  judged  me  wrongly,  that 
I  was  quite  sure  of  the  ground  on  which  I  stood.  He  said  he  was 
sorry  if  he  had  judged  me  wrongly,  but  thought  it  most  regrettable 
that  I  should  take  up  such  an  attitude. 

We  were  then  equipped  with  steel  helmet  and  gas  mask,  and 
given  into  charge  of  a  provost  sergeant.  We  were  taken  from  place 
to  place  behind  the  lines  all  that  day,  and  stopped  that  night  at  i 
place  where  we  met  Mark  Briggs.  On  the  morning  after  Kirwan  and 
I  arrived  there  we  were  taken  before  a  colonel,  in  company  with 
Briggs.  This  colonel  told  us  that  he  was  sending  us  up  the  lines,  and 
if  we  disobeyed  orders  we  would  have  to  stand  the  consequences. 
Prior  to  going  up  before  him,  I  was  given  an  order  by  the  provost- 
sergeant  in  charge  of  us,  which  order  I  refused.  He  instantly  dealt 
me  a  blow  in  the  jaw,  which  knocked  me  down.  Each  time  I  tried 
to  rise  he  struck  me  again.  When  I  had  got  up  the  last  time  he  had 
gone  out  of  the  hut.  W^hen  I  saw  him  again  I  asked  him  if  he  had 
anything  personal  against  me,  but  he  said  he  had  not;  he  had  his 
orders  and  intended  to  carry  them  out.  I  told  him  that  was  all  I 
wished  to  know. 

From  there  we  proceeded  with  the  provost-sergeant  to  the  Belgian 
Chateau  near  the  old  town  of  Ypres.  Kirwan,  Briggs  and  I  were 
then  taken  before  an  officer.  This  officer  told  us  what  he  thought  of 
u.'^,  and  asked  me  why  it  was  that  I  had  refused  to  obey  orders.  When 
I  replied,  he  complained  of  my  want  of  modesty  in  setting  forth  my 
objections,  and  for  saying  that  I  would  stand  firm  on  my  convictions 
and  to  the  truth  as  I  knew  it,  no  matter  what  happened  to  me.  I 
answerer]  that  he  had  spoken  freely  to  me,  and  that  I  might  as  well 

80 


ARCnilBAI.D  McC.  I..  BAXTER. 

speak  frankly  and  honestly — that  1  had  certainly  no  wish  to  givo 
offence.  He  also  spoke  to  Briggs,  and  then  dismissed  us.  We  were 
.then  taken  to  a  hut,  and  told  to  stay  there  until  further  orders.  We 
were  next  brought  before  a  captain,  who  received  us  one  at  a  time. 
When  I  was  taken  in  before  him  he  said  he  wanted  me  to  realise  my 
position  in  the  Army.  He  said  that  I  was  not  justifying  my  existence. 
I  told  him  why  I  objected  and  why  I  refused  orders,  and  he  said  that 
the  trouble  was  that  none  of  the  fourteen  men  who  had  been  forcibly 
sent  out  of  N.Z.  could  claim  to  be  conscientiously  opposed  to  war, 
at  least  not  lawfully,  as  they  did  not  belons  to  denominations  in  thvi 
tenets  of  whose  creed  war  is  forbidden.  He  signed  a  document  and 
save  it  to  me,  and  sent  me  to  another  (^amp.  This  document  stated 
that  I  was  not  under  military  control.  He  sent  a  runner  with  me, 
who  took  me  to  this  Camp  and  presented  me  to  Headquarters  there. 
They  took  my  name,  and  gave  me  to  understand  that  I  was  attached 
to  the  Battalion.  I  presented  the  document  the  captain  gave  me 
and  they  took  a  copy  of  it,  and  said  that  they  would  wait  till  they 
saw  the  captain.  He  came  to  the  Camp  later  in  the  day,  and  told  me 
that  I  could  do  anything  I  chose:  that  I  could  start  when  I  liked  and 
stop  when  I  liked,  and  that  I  would  not  be  under  any  military  control 
whatever,  as  the  document  stated.  He  said  that  I  would  not  be  asked 
to  do  anything  that  would  be  against  my  conscience.  When  I  asked 
whose  control  I  would  be  under,  he  said  that  I  would  be  under  his 
own  private  control.  I  told  him  I  had  been  attached  to  the  Battalion 
as  soon  as  I  arrived  there.  He  said  that  they  should  not  have  at- 
tached me,  and  asked  me  if  I  had  shown  them  the  document  he  had 
I  realised  that  everything  there  was  under  military  direction,  and 
given  me.  I  told  him  that  I  had  presented  it,  and  I  also  said  that 
that  the  paper  he  had  given  me  was  absolutely  worthless  to  me  if 
any  other  officer  was  put  in  his  place.  He  said  he  had  looked  on  me 
before  as  a  fanatic,  but  that  henceforth  he  would  regard  me  as  an 
absolute  obstructionist,  and  that  he  would  rather  see  me  with  my 
skull  knocked  in  behind  a  parapet  than  that  I  should  ever  see  New 
Zealand  again.  I  said:  "Well,  sir,  I  think  you  are  very  imcharitable 
and  unjust,  for  1  have  no  such  wish  towards  you."  He  said:  "Well, 
at  any  rale  you  are  not  much  better  than  the  men  who  are  being 
sent  to  jail  in  New  Zealand."  I  said  that  I  had  no  doubt  that  they 
were  sending  better  men  than  me  to  jail.  He  said  that  he  had  in- 
structions from  Headquarters  regarding  us,  and  that  he  wished  to 
warn  me.  He  said  that  these  instructions  were  very  harsh,  and  that 
if  I  did  not  listen  to  reason  violence  was  sure  to  be  used  against  me. 
I  told  him  that  violence  had  already  been  used  against  me,  and  that 
I  was  prepared  for  whatever  was  in  store  for  me.  He  then  sent  me 
back  to  the  camp  I  had  jusi  left,  the  Belgian  Chateau. 

When  I  got  there  the  provost-sergeant  came  to  the  hut  I  was  in 
and  told  me  I  was  to  get  no  food  until  I  promised  to  obey  orders.  I 
remained  there  for  three  days  without  food.     I  was  not  locked  up,  but 

81 


ARMAGEDDON   OR   CALVARY. 

he  told  me  I  was  not  allowed  to  draw  my  rations  there,  and  I  did  not 
ask  for  anything  except  once,  when  I  asked  the  orderly  in  the  ser- 
geants' mess  if  he  had  any  tea  left  over.  He  told  me  there  was  some, 
and  said  to  help  myself,  as  he  was  not  allowed  to  give  me  anything. 
I  took  some  tea  in  a  tin,  but  the  provost-sergeant  came  up  at  the 
time,  grabbed  it  out  of  my  hand,  and  emptied  the  contents.  Next 
day  the  cook  called  me  over  to  the  dug-out  and  gave  me  some  food. 
He  gave  me  food  the  next  day  also,  and  the  sergeant  did  not  interfere. 

Next  day  I  was  sent  back  to  the  Otago  Camp,  and  remained  there. 
About  two  days  after,  an  officer  came  to  me  and  said  that  Kirwan 
wished  to  see  me.  He  said  that  Kirwan  wished  to  speak  to  me  alone, 
and  asked  me  to  promise  not  to  influence  him  in  any  way  that  would 
thwart  the  purpose  of  the  Army.  I  made  no  promise,  but  he  sent 
Kirwan  down  to  see  me.  Kirwan  told  me  that  he  had  refused  orders 
all  the  time  he  had  been  there,  and  that  he  would  always  reserve 
the  right  to  refuse  when  he  could  not  conscientiously  obey.  I  agreed 
with  him  on  this  point  absolutely.  He  told  me  he  was  being  sent  to 
a  Base  Hospital.     I  did  not  see  Kirwan  again. 

The  captain  to  whom  I  have  already  referred  spoke  to  me  again, 
and  told  me  that  he  would  see  about  getting  me  a  hut  or  dug-out  to 
myself.  When  I  had  last  seen  him  I  was  in  a  hut  alone,  but  at  this 
time  I  was  with  a  platoon.  I  told  the  captain  that  I  would  much 
rather  stay  where  I  was,  for  all  the  soldiers  were  friendly  to  me,  and 
that  I  knew  a  good  many  of  them  before. 

I  heard  one  day  that  Mark  Briggs  had  been  badly  knocked  about. 
I  went  into  the  medical  hut  and  saw  him.  The  provost-sergeant  told 
me  that  Briggs  was  not  expected  to  live,  and  that  if  he  did  live  he 
was  to  be  shot.  Briggs  told  me  that  he  had  been  dragged  on  a  rope 
along  the  "duck  walk"  for  about  a  mile  by  four  men,  and  then  thrown 
into  a  shell  hole.  At  the  time  when  I  saw  him  there  first  he  was 
lying  helpless  on  a  bed,  and  the  M.O.  came  in  while  I  was  there  and 
attended  to  his  injuries.  I  was  about  to  leave,  but  he  said  I  could 
remain,  so  I  watched  him  dress  Briggs's  back,  nearly  the  whole  lower 
portion  of  which  was  torn  raw.  Briggs  was  very  pale,  and  looked  like 
an  old  man,  but  was  not  downhearted.  When  I  came  out  of  the  hut 
I  met  the  provost-sergeant,  and  he  said:  "Well,  have  you  seen  your 
friend?"  I  said  that  I  had  seen  his  own  dirty  work,  and  he  replied: 
"That's  the  way  you'll  be  to-morrow."  He  said  what  had  happened 
to  Briggs  was  Briggs's  own  fault,  and  that  no  man  but  a  madman 
would  endure  it.  Next  morning  the  sergeant  came  to  me  and  said: 
"Now,  Baxter,  to  begin  with,  we  are  going  to  give  you  the  father  of 
all  hidings  before  you  leave  this  hut."  I  told  him  if  those  were  his 
orders,  and  he  deemed  it  his  duty  to  carry  them  out,  I  would  make 
no  complaint.  He  then  ordered  the  men  who  were  with  him  to  bring 
me  alons;.  I  went  with  them,  and  the  sergeant  led  the  way  to  a  place 
behind  the  front  trenches,  where  he  took  me  before  an  officer  and  ex- 
plained the  seriousness  of  my  position.    The  sergeant  said  that  he  did 

82 


ARCHIBALD  McC.  h.  BAXTER. 

not  wish  me  to  be  under  any  misapprehension  as  to  what  was  going 
to  happen.  He  said  he  was  going  to  give  me  an  order,  and  if  I  refused 
to  obey  it  I  would  be  instantly  shot  dead  and  that  he  himself  would 
do  the  deed.  I  told  them  that  I  fully  realised  the  position.  The  officer 
said  that  nothing  I  had  to  say  now  mattered,  and  reminded  me  that 
I  was  not  in  N.Z.,  but  in  France  under  shell  fire.  I  was  then  given 
an  order  by  the  sergeant,  which  I  refused  to  obey.  The  sergeant 
struck  me  on  the  mouth,  and  ordered  me  again,  and  I  again  refused. 
He  then  struck  me  under  the  jaw,  making  my  mouth  bleed,  and  when 
I  refused  again  he  said  I  was  to  get  nothing  but  this  treatment  until 
I  obeyed.  He  struck  me  again  on  the  face  and  on  the  body  several 
times.  I  told  him  that  under  the  circumstances  I  would  neither  obey 
nor  retaliate  though  he  punched  me  to  death.  Some  of  the  troops 
who  were  looking  on  called  out  to  him  to  stop,  and  he  then  took  me 
along  to  a  pillbox  and  ordered  me  again,  and  when  I  again  refused,  he 
kept  digging  me  in  the  ribs  for  a  while  and  ordering  me  again  and 
again.  The  work  he  was  ordering  me  to  do  was  to  my  mind  equal 
to  combatant  service,  and  I  told  him  I  would  rather  be  shot  than  do 
it.  He  then  took  me  along  till  we  met  an  officer,  and  he  asked  the 
officer  if  he  could  direct  him  to  a  place  that  was  being  heavily  shelled. 
The  officer  pointed  out  an  ammunition  dump  at  some  distance,  and 
told  him  to  take  me  along  there  for  a  while.  The  provost-sergeant 
took  me  to  this  place,  which  had  been  heavily  shelled  a  few  minutes 
before,  and  ordered  me  to  stand  there.  When  he  was  leaving  me  he 
said  that  he  hoped  that  a  shell  would  get  me  and  blow  me  up  to  my 
Maker.  The  fire  was  very  heavy  for  some  time,  and  then  slackened 
off,  and  I  stayed  where  I  was.  When  the  sergeant  came  back  he  said 
I  was  a  fool  to  stay  there,  and  that  I  must  have  wanted  to  commit 
suicide.  He  said  that  he  had  done  his  part,  and  was  not  in  love  with 
the  job,  and  that  he  did  not  want  to  have  anything  more  to  do  with 
me,  for  he  believed  me  mad.  He  then  left  me,  saying  that  he  would 
have  to  send  in  a  report  concerning  me,  and  that  in  the  meantime 
I  should  stay  with  the  Otago  boys.  I  did  so,  and  did  not  see  much 
of  this  sergeant  again,  for  he  left  a  few  days  later. 

After  this,  Colonel  Mitchell  came  to  me  and  asked  me  how  I  was 
getting  on.  I  told  him  that  I  was  all  right.  He  asked  me  if  there 
was  anything  he  could  do  for  me,  and  I  said  that  I  did  not  know  of 
anything.  He  asked  if  I  had  no  request  at  all  and  no  complaints,  and 
I  replied  that  I  had  none.  He  then  said  he  was  not  going  to  allow 
me  to  be  punished  again,  and  would  have  to  see  the  General  about 
me.  He  told  me  he  thought  that  I  must  have  a  mental  twist,  and  I 
replied  that  he  could  think  what  he  liked,  but  that  I  had  nothing  of 
the  kind.  He  said  that  he  would  see  Headquarters  about  me,  and  that 
if  I  had  any  request  or  complaint  to  make  to  communicate  with  him. 

A  few  days  after  this  we  left  the  Ypres  front  and  went  back  to 
Abele.  1  camped  that  night  in  a  hut  with  .Mark  Briggs  and  several 
others.     Briggs  could  hardly  walk.     It  was  a  cold  night,  and  when  he 

bo 


ARMAGEDDON   OR   CALVARY. 

lay  down  on  the  floor  I  noticed  that  he  had  no  blankets  and  offered 
him  mine,  but  he  refused  to  take  it.  The  next  morning  the  same 
oflBcer  who  was  there  when  Briggs  was  knocked  about  came  into  the 
hut  and  ordered  me  to  go  out  to  drill,  and  I  told  him  that  i  did  not 
go  out  on  parade.  He  ordered  me  again,  and  I  refused,  and  he  then 
struck  me  in  the  face,  knocking  me  down.  I  got  up  and  he  ordered 
me  again,  and  when  I  refused  again  he  kicked  me  and  then  struck 
me  another  blow  and  knocked  me  down.  While  I  was  down  he  kicked 
me  several  times  about  the  body.  I  was  knocked  out,  and  he  then 
ordered  four  men  to  carry  me  on  to  the  parade  ground.  They  picked 
me  up  and  carried  me  out  of  the  hut.  When  they  got  me  out  on  the 
duck-walk  the  officer  ordered  them  to  lift  me  up  high  and  let  me 
fall  on  my  back  on  the  boards.  He  ordered  them  three  times,  but 
each  time  they  let  me  down  very  gently.  He  then  ordered  them  to 
proceed,  and  they  carried  me  out  on  to  the  parade  ground  and  set 
me  on  my  feet,  but  I  felt  beat  out,  and  lay  down  against  my  valise. 

Colonel  Mitchell  passed  along  the  ranks  with  some  other  officers 
and  asked  me  what  was  the  matter  with  me.  I  told  him  that  I  was 
right  enough,  and  he  passed  on.  I  lay  there  for  an  hour  or  two, 
while  the  troops  shifted  to  another  camp  not  far  distant.  Four  men 
came  to  me,  and  said  that  they  had  been  sent  to  bring  me  down  to 
this  other  camp,  and  that  they  had  been  told  that  if  I  would  not  walk 
they  were  to  carry  me.  This  camp  was  only  about  half  a  mile  dis- 
tant, and  I  walked  with  a  man  supporting  me  on  each  side.  They 
gave  me  several  spells  on  the  way,  and  when  they  got  there  they 
took  me  into  a  hut  and  put  some  blankets  over  me  and  brought  me  a 
drink  of  hot  tea. 

I  lay  there  until  the  afternoon,  and  the  officer  who  had  dealt  with 
me  in  the  morning  came  in  and  ordered  me  to  go  out  on  parade,  but 
I  made  no  answer.  He  asked  me  if  I  was  going  out  and  I  said  "No." 
He  said  that  he  would  have  me  dragged  out.  He  then  left  me,  and 
in  a  while  two  men  came  and  told  me  that  they  had  been  ordered  to 
bring  me  out.  They  took  me  out  and  laid  me  down  a  few  yards  from 
the  hut.  From  there  I  was  taken  before  the  Medical  Officer,  who  asked 
me  what  was  the  matter.  I  told  him  that  I  had  not  paraded  sick  of  my 
own  accord  but  had  been  brought  there,  that  I  was  bruised  from 
head  to  foot,  but  had  no  complaint  to  make  against  anyone.  He  gave 
me  some  tablets,  and  I  was  taken  back  to  the  hut,  and  remained 
there  that  night. 

Next  morning  we  left  that  place  and  set  out  for  the  Somme  by 
train.  We  were  crammed  into  trucks  in  the  usual  way,  and  as  T 
was  nor  well  I  had  a  hard  time.  I  do  not  remember  the  names  of  the 
places  we  were  at  out  there.  My  health  seemed  to  have  given  way, 
but  I  did  not  go  on  sick  parade.  No  violence  was  used  while  at  the 
Somme  or  after.  I  was  taken  to  a  dressing  station  one  morning  by 
two  soldiers.  I  had  to  be  carried  at  that  time,  and  had  not  much 
life  l(ft   in  Mie.     I  was  put  on  an  ambulance  waggon  and  sent  off  to 

84 


ARCHIBALD  MeC.  L.  BAXTER. 

a  hospital,  where  I  was  attended  to,  and  a  day  or  two  after  was  sent 
to  Boulogne,  and  received  into  hospital  there.  After  the  Medical 
Officer  examined  me  he  asked  me  if  I  had  been  under  heavj-  shell 
fire,  and  I  told  him  that  I  had  on  many  occasions.  He  asked  me  how  I 
came  by  certain  marks  of  old  bruises,  and  I  told  him  some  of  my  his- 
tory. He  asked  me  if  I  had  been  knocked  down  by  a  shell  at  any 
time,  and  I  told  him  that  I  had,  but  that  I  had  not  been  hurt.  He 
then  told  me  that  he  was  glad  I  had  told  him  all  about  myself,  and 
that  he  did  not  blame  me  for  my  opinions.  He  told  me  that  he  would 
do  anything  he  could  for  me,  that  I  had  been  sent  in  there  a  sick 
man,  and  his  business  was  to  make  me  well. 

I  was  very  weak  at  this  time,  and  about  five  weeks  later,  when  I 
was  sent  to  England,  I  had  not  picked  up  much, being  still  just  over 
eight  stone,  about  three  stone  below  my  ordinary  weight. 

This  Medical  Officer  at  Boulogne  was  one  of  the  broadest-minded 
and  most  generous-hearted  men  that  I  have  ever  met,  and  he  had  a 
fine  sense  of  humour.  It  was  a  good  thing  for  me  that  I  met  him 
for  at  that  time  I  was  driven  to  the  brink  of  an  abyss.  After  I  had 
been  in  hospital  for  a  few  days  in  England  the  M.O.  came  to  me  and 
asked  me  why  I  disobeyed  orders  in  France,  and  I  told  him  what  the 
orders  were,  and  he  began  to  argue  with  me  on  the  law  of  "the  sur- 
vival of  the  fittest."  I  told  him  that  to  my  mind  the  fratricide  and  the 
suicide  are  much  the  same,  and  that  the  man  who  kills  his  fellows, 
believing  that  he  is  doing  wrong,  commits  moral  and  intellectual  sui- 
cide. He  told  me  that  I,  through  what  I  called  passive  resistance,  and 
what  he  would  call  my  stubbornness,  had  put  myself  in  a  position  of 
absolute  dependence  on  the  Army.  I  replied  that  I  was  not  ungrate- 
ful for  what  had  been  done  for  me,  but  that  I  thought  the  Army  was 
responsible  for  me,  for  the  military  authorities  knew  what  I  was  before 
ever  they  sent  me  out,  but,  if  he  did  not  want  me  there,  all  he  had  to 
do  was  to  allow  me  to  go  out,  and  that  I  would  look  after  myself  and 
find  my  way  back  to  New  Zealand  on  my  own.  He  talked  to  me  no 
more,  but  sent  me  to  bed  for  three  days  for  what  he  was  pleased  to 
call  my  insolence. 

There  were  a  good  few  of  the  N.Z.  boys  there,  and  they  wore  all 
good  friends  with  me,  and  after  a  few  months  I  was  much  t)ettor.  We 
were  visited  by  a  N.Z.  colonel  one  day.  and  he  told  several  of  us  that 
we  were  being  sent  back  to  N.Z.  He  told  me  that  he  had  heard  about 
me,  and  was  surprised  to  find  me  so  well.  He  wished  us  a  safe  voy- 
age home,  and  then  left  us.  A  few  days  after  we  were  told  that  wo 
were  to  embark  at  Southampton  the  following  day.  We  crossed  from 
that  port  to  Le  Havre,  and  travelled  down  through  France  by  rail  to 
Marseilles,  and  there  embarked  on  the  Maraama.  attt'i  spending  a  few 
days  at  a  place  near  the  town.  We  went  ashore  ai  Coloinho  for  a  day 
and  also  at  Albany,  and  then  came  on  to  Auckland,  and  next  to 
Wellin.ulon. 

When  we  came  in  at  Wellington  the  M.O.  called  me  and  said  that 

85 


ARMAGEDDON   OR   CALVARY. 

I  was  to  go  before  Colonel  Allen  and  Mr.  Myers.  I  went  along  with 
the  M.O.,  and  he  showed  me  into  a  room  where  these  two  gentlemen 
were  sitting,  and  the  M.O.  introduced  me  to  them  and  went  out.  Mr. 
Myers  asked  me  to  sit  down,  and  then  asked  me  a  few  questions  about 
my  health.  Sir  James  Allen  asked  me  if  I  was  still  of  the  same  mind 
with  regard  to  military  service,  and  I  told  him  that  I  was.  He  then 
asked  me  if  I  had  been  badly  treated  while  in  the  Army,  and  said 
that  they  had  been  charged  with  treating  me  and  other  Objectors  very 
cruelly.  I  said  that  I  had  received  treatment  that  I  would  call  cruel. 
He  asked  me  if  I  had  any  complaint  to  make  to  him,  and  I  replied 
that  I  did  not  think  that  I  should  make  a  complaint  while  the  men 
against  whom  I  would  have  to  make  it  were  not  here  in  New  Zealand. 
He  then  asked  me  what  I  was  doing  while  at  the  front,  and  I  told  him 
that  I  was  given  a  document  by  the  Commanding  Officer,  which  stated 
that  I  was  not  under  military  control,  and  all  that  I  had  done  in  the 
Army  was  done  by  me  voluntarily,  out  of  a  sense  of  fairness  to  the 
men  I  was  with.  He  asked  me  whether  I  was  a  Conscientious  Objec- 
tor, and  I  answered  that  I  was  called  one  in  the  Army,  but  did  not 
call  myself  by  any  name.  He  said:  "Why  did  you  object  to  military 
service?"  and  I  replied,  "Because  I  am  against  war."  He  then  asked 
me  did  I  know  anything  about  No.  1  Field  Punishment,  and  I  replied, 
"Not  much."  He  said  that  a  letter  that  I  had  written  from  France 
had  been  published  in  the  papers,  and  that  I  had  stated  in  that  letter 
that  I  had  been  subjected  to  this  punishment,  and  asked  if  that  was 
true.  I  told  him  that  I  did  not  know  that  the  letter  had  been  pub- 
lished, but  that  it  was  all  quite  true. 

I  think  I  have  told  pretty  well  all  that  passed  at  that  interview 
except  that  Sir  James  asked  me  to  describe  No.  1  Field  Punishment, 
and  I  stood  against  the  cabin  wall  and  showed  how  my  arms  were 
fastened  and  how  my  legs  were  tied  at  the  knees  and  ankles.  Sir 
James  asked  me,  "What  do  you  intend  doing  now?"  and  I  said,  "I 
don't  know  yet  what  is  going  to  be  done  with  me,"  and  he  said  that 
there  might  possibly  be  an  enquiry  into  these  matters,  and  I  said 
that  if  there  was  I  would  speak  the  truth. 

Mr.  Myers  asked  me  concerning  my  condition  when  in  hospital.  I 
told  him  that  I  had  been  put  in  an  observation  ward  for  a  day  or  two 
when  I  first  went  in,  and  that  I  asked  the  Medical  Officer  why  he  put 
me  there,"  and  he  asked  me  if  it  troubled  me,  and  I  said  that  it  did, 
and  the  Medical  Officer  then  took  me  into  another  ward,  where  there 
were  some  New  Zealanders. 

This  closed  the  interview,  and  I  went  back  to  my  ward,  and  pre- 
sently two  friends  came  on  board  to  see  me.  I  was  surprised  to  hear 
from  them  of  a  message  which  had  been  received  by  my  people  from 
Base  Records,  stating  that  I  had  been  admitted  to  hospital  in  the 
United  Kingdom,  and  that  "my  mental  condition  was  causing  anxiety." 
I  cannot  believe  that  any  of  the  .Medical  Officers  in  the  hospitals  were 
responsible  for  such  a  statement,  and  certainly  no  New  Zealand  M.O. 

8€ 


ARCHIBALD  McC.  L.  BAXTER. 

could  make  such  a  statement,  for  I  never  met  a  N.Z.  Medical  OfiQcer 
from  the  time  when  I  was  taken  from  the  dressing  station  in  France 
until  I  went  aboard  the  hospital  ship  at  Marseilles. 

Shortly  after  I  arrived  at  home  a  statement  concerning  me  ap- 
peared in  the  Otago  Daily  Times,  headed  "Baxter  Case. — The  Con- 
scientious Objector,"  and  it  was  declared  in  this  statement  that  I 
had  set  up  my  will  in  opposition  to  the  will  of  the  community.  Now, 
I  would  like  to  say  in  this  connection  that  with  me  it  was  not  a  mat- 
ter of  setting  up  my  will  against  the  public,  but  of  doing  what  I  be- 
lieved to  be  right,  and  refusing  to  do  what  I  believed  to  be  wrong;  and 
I  do  not  believe  that  all  that  was  done  to  me  and  to  other  Objectors 
was  done  by  the  will  of  the  community. 

All  that  1  need  to  say  in  conclusion  is  that,  although  it  was  said  that 
I  appealed  as  a  Religious  Objector,  as  a  matter  of  fact  I  did  not 
appeal  before  a  board  on  any  ground  at  all,  although  I  sent  in  a 
notice  of  appeal  in  which  I  stated  that  I  would  not  act  against  my 
belief,  and  that  by  the  help  of  God  I  would  do  no  violence  to  any  man. 
I  was  told  in  France  that  in  my  case  it  was  not  a  question  of  services 
at  all,  but  of  submission.  I  did  not  see  that  it  mattered  whether  I 
appealed  or  not,  for  I  did  mot  look  for  exemption.  My  real  appeal 
was  my  conduct  in  the  Army,  and  I  have  been  discharged  with  a  good 
character. 

(Signed)  A.  McC.  L.  BAXTER. 


XVII.— GARTH  C.  BALLANTYNE. 

My  objections  to  military  service  were  based  mostly  on  humani- 
tarian reasons  and  also  on  political  grounds.  I  have  been  all  my  life, 
and  still  am,  an  absolute  pacifist.  My  experiences,  both  in  and  out  of 
the  flring-line,  have  confirmed  and  strengthened  my  opinions,  and  I 
also  take  this  opportunity  of  stating  that  under  similar  circum.stances 
I  would  again  act  precisely  as  I  did  before. 

I  am  writing  this  statement  in  answer  to  numerous  requests,  not 
only  of  my  personal  friends,  but  also  of  many  soldiers  who  have  heard 
of  or  seen  a  little  of  what  I  went  through.  Also  I  feci  it  my  duty  to 
make  public  a  description  of  British  military  prisons  in  France,  and 
to  show  people  what  oven  New  Zealandors  are  capalile  of  doing  when 
backed  by  militarism. 

It  was  at  the  Alexandra  Barracks.  Wellinj^ton.  that  I  first  experi- 
enced that  cold  shiver  run  down  my  spine  as  the  cell  door  shut  to  and 
the  bolts  shot  home.  Never  will  I  forget  my  feelings  as  I  stood  look- 
ing at  the  back  of  that  door  and  analysing  my  thoughts.  I  could  not 
help  thinking  of  the  animals  in  the  Zoo,  and  my  sympathy  went  out 
to  those  poor  caged  creatures  as  it  had  never  done  before. 

87 


ARMAC4EDD0N   OR    CALVARY. 

I  had  failed  to  go  to  camp  when  called  up  under  the  Conscription 
Act,  and  had  determined,  after  thinking  things  over,  that  I  would  not 
run  away,  but  would  stay  quietly  at  my  home  and  face  the  matter  out. 
A  civilian  .policeman  had  found  me  there  that  morning  and  arrested 
me,  and  I  was  awaiting  a  military  escort  to  take  me  to  Trentham  Camp 
in  the  evening.  I  spent  that  night  in  the  guardroom,  and  was  charged 
next  morning,  before  Colonel  Potter,  with  failing  to  report  to  camp 
on  the  5th  of  .March,  1917,  as  ordered. 

On  this,  my  first  apearance  at  an  orderly-room,  I  must  admit  to  a 
little  nervousness,  but  I  managed  to  declare  pretty  emphatically  that 
I  had  no  intention  of  becoming  a  soldier.  This,  however,  failed  to  con- 
vince the  colonel,  who  merely  reprimanded  me  and  told  me  that  if  I 
''carried  on"  I  should  hear  no  more  about  my  two  weeks'  overdue. 

Previous  to  my  arrest,  I  had  been  unable  to  ascertain  whether 
there  were  any  more  like  myself  in  camp  at  that  time,  so  that  my 
delight  can  well  be  imagined  when,  on  being  marched  to  the  Q.M. 
Stores  with  a  small  party  of  other  men,  three  more  besides  myself 
refused  to  accept  the  uniform.  The  oflBcers  at  first  affected  the  usual 
surprise  with  which  they  generally  heard  of  our  refusals  to  obey 
orders,  bat  when  they  found  that  we  were  in  earnest  sent  for  the 
police,  and  had  us  all  returned  to  the  guardroom,  where  we  lost  no 
time  in  getting  acquainted  with  one  another. 

Twenty-eight  days"  detention  was  the  verdict  next  morning,  and 
I  found  myself  once  more  under  arrest,  returning  to  Alexandra  Bar- 
racks. 

The  lime  passed  fairly  uneventfully  with  no  particularly  great 
hardship,  although  not  being  as  yet  used  to  imprisonment,  I  found  the 
loss  of  liberty  very  trying.  Here  I  made  the  acquaintance  of  some 
more  comrades,  including  the  Baxter  Bros,  and  Little. 

Again  returned  to  Trentham,  I  went  through  the  same  performance 
at  the  Stores,  and  this  time  was  remanded  for  a  District  Courtmartial, 
which  took  place  about  a  week  later.  The  attitude  I  adopted  at  the 
trial  was  to  ignore  the  Court  and  to  deny  its  right  to  try  me.  This 
was  of  no  avail,  and  a  week  later  I  found  myself,  in  company  with 
three  others,  journeying  to  the  Terrace  Jail,  with  84  days'  hard  labour 
ahead  of  me.  On  arrival  there^we  went  through  the  same  performance 
as  any  ordinary  criminals  would  have  done,  and  shortly  afterwards 
each  of  us  was  deriving  great  amusement  out  of  the  awkward  figures 
the  others  cut  in  their  ill-fitting  prison  clothing,  my  mates  having  an 
extra  laugh  at  me  because  my  broad  arrows  showed  up  very  plainly. 

Throughout  the  course  of -our  sentences  we  were  associated  with 
and  treated  as  ordinary  criminals.  When  I  first  started  to  work  in 
ihe  -Ml.  Cook  Prison  I  had  on  one  side  of  me  a  man  convicted  of  a 
hideous  sexual  offence  and  on  the  other  a  man  who  had  twice  been 
declared  an  habitual  criminal.  I  found  the  conversation  of  the  ma- 
jority of  the  prisoners  horrible  to  listen  to.  What  attracted  most  of 
their   attention   was   the   Supreme   Court   sittings,   and   they   discussed 


GARTH  (\  BALLAXTYMv 

the  various  crimes  with  brutal  freedom.  Whenever  I  talked  with  them 
myself  I  strove  to  draw  them  out  to  talk  of  themselves  in  order  to 
hear  their  ideas  of  our  present  system  of  dealing  with  offenders 
against  the  law,  and  from  what  I  heard  there  and  from  my  own 
observations  I  came  to  the  conclusion  that  our  prisons  were  makinc: 
ten  hardened  criminals  to  every  one  they  cured.  I  hope  that  sweepin^ 
reforms  will  soon  be  brought  about. 

Of  our  treatment  by  the  prison  authorities  I  have  no  particular 
complaint  to  make.  "We  were  sent  to  them  as  criminals,  and  as 
criminals,  no  more  and  no  less,  we  were  treated.  The  fault  lay  with 
those  who  sent  ns  there. 

T  was  within  a  w'eek  of  finishing  my  sentence,  and  was  looking  for- 
ward to  getting  back  to  Trentham,  where  I  would  be  able  to  see  my 
people  in  private  and  not  in  the  presence  of  a  warder,  when  one  morn- 
ing before  breakfast  the  principal  warder  came  to  my  cell  and  told 
me  to  pack  up  my  kit,  as  I  was  "going  away."  I  remembered  after- 
wards that  he  had  seemed  to  put  peculiar  expression  into  the  words, 
although  he  professed  ignorance  as  to  the  meaning  of  our  shif. , 
beyond  the  fact  that  I  was  to  return  to  the  Terrace  Jail.  On  comin.j; 
out  into  the  yard  with  my  belongings,  I  was  surprised  and  pleased  to 
find  that  the  others  had  received  similar  instructions.  On  our  arrival 
at  the  Terrace  Jail  the  mystery  was  not  solved,  as  the  warders  told 
us  that  thoy  knew  nothing,  except  that  we  were  to  be  handed  back  to 
the  military  authorities.  Accordingly,  we  bathed  and  shaved  and  our 
own  clothes  were  returned  to  us,  and  we  awaited  developments.  The 
military,  however,  preferred  to  do  their  work  in  the  dark,  and  so  we 
had  to  wait  until  evening  for  the  escort  to  arrive.  The  escort  refused 
us  any  information,  and  we  set  out,  as  I  thought,  towards  Lambton 
Station.  We  did  not.  however,  stop  at  the  station,  but  passed  it, 
heading  for  the  wharves;  and  now,  for  the  first  time,  I  realised  that 
there  had  been  some  foundation  for  the  very  vague  rumours  whic'i 
had  reached  us  to  the  effect  that  we  were  to  be  placed  on  a  troop- 
ship. 

On  arrival  at  the  wharves  we  proceeded  to  the  side  of  the  Waitemata, 
and  were  ordered  to  uo  aboard  by  the  escort.  This  we  refused  to  do. 
The  escort  then  used  force,  and  carried  or  hustled  ail  my  mates  on 
board.  The  m.p..  however,  who  was  standing  beside  nic  evidently 
did  not  relish  his  job,  for  he  asked  me  whether  I  was  uoinu  on  board, 
and  I  replied,  "Not  of  my  own  free  will."  "Quite  right,  '  he  answered, 
"and  I  am  not  going  to  put  you  there."  I  was  thus  it  ft  standing  on 
the  wharf  for  five  minutes  or  so,  duriny  wliich  time  a  fair  crowd  of 
watersiders,  who  happened  to  be  changing  shift  at  tliat  time,  had 
gathered  around,  and  I  spoke  to  them,  telling  them  exactly  what  wis 
happening,  and  askinu  them  to  spread  the  news.  A  voice  replie.1 
that  we  had  their  sympathy  to  which  I  answered-  as  Mark  Bri.uus  had 
also  answered — that  someihiim  more  than  sympathy  was  required, 
and   that    it    was   up   to   the    workers    to   see   that    no   more   were   sent 

89 


ARMAGEDDON   OR   CALVARY. 

away  as  we  were  being  sent.  Other  m.p.  were  now  returning  from 
the  ship,  and  on  seeing  me  promptly  grabbed  me  and  carried  me  on 
board  and  down  to  join  the  others  in  the  guardroom.  A  strong  guard 
was  left  over  us  all  night  to  ensure  that  we  should  not  communicate 
with  anyone  on  shore,  and  although  my  mother  was  living  within  half  ., 
an  hour's  walk  of  the  boat,  and  was  also  on  the  telephone,  my  re- 
quests to  be  allowed  to  communicate  with  her  were  refused. 

Next  morning  our  numbers  were  increased  by  others  brought  from 
the  Barracks  and  from  the  Camp,  and  the  fourteen  C.O.'s  now  on 
board  comprised  the  three  Baxter  Bros.,  Little,  Briggs,  Sanderson, 
Patton,  Adin,  Penwright,  Harland,  Gray,  Kirwan,  Maguire  and  myself. 
Whether  it  was  accidental  or  not  I  don't  know,  but  it  was  certainly 
curious  that  there  were  among  us  men  from  almost  every  province 
of  New  Zealand. 

[To  avoid  repetition,  I  have  omitted  those  portions  of  Mr.  Ballan- 
tyne's  account  of  the  voyage  from  Wellington  to  Capetown,  which  are  v 
wholly  in  substantiation  of  Mr.  Briggs's  account.  Mr.  Ballantyne 
mentions  that  when  they  were  ordered  to  have  their  hair  cut  short  the 
C.O.'s  refused,  and  were  carried  out  one  by  one  on  to  the  hatchway 
by  the  guard,  and  there  their  hair  was  cut  very  short.  "A  sharp 
struggle  ensued  when  Briggs  attempted  to  resist  the  guard,  and  it 
took  about  six  of  them  to  hold  him  down  whilst  the  barber  cut  his 
hair."  Mr.  Ballantyne  also  mentions  that,  while  they  were  being 
forcibly  stripped  and  re-dressed  in  uniform  on  the  first  occasion,  a 
soldier  with  a  sense  of  humour  set  a  gramophone  playing  "Onward, 
Christian  Soldiers."      Mr.  Ballantyne's  narrative  proceeds.- — ^Ed.] 

One  day  we  were  informed  that  the  doctor  had  given  instructions 
that  we  were  to  do  physical  drill.  We  replied  that  if  we  were  sup- 
plied with  skipping  ropes,  etc.,  we  would  take  sufficient  exercise  to 
keep  us  in  health.  The  corporal  of  the  guard  went  away  satisfied,  but 
returned  shortly  afterwards  and  said  that  he  had  received  instructions 
that  he  was  to  make  us  run  round  the  deck  and  that  he  was  to  use 
the  bayonet,  if  necessary,  to  carry  this  out.  When  we  got  on  deck, 
however,  we  all  sat  down  and  refused  to  move,  in  spite  of  the  guard, 
who  stood  around  with  fixed  bayonets.  The  corporal,  seeing  that  we 
were  not  to  be  bluffed,  again  went  away,  and  this  time  returned  with 
.some  .skipping  ropes  and  removed  the  guard. 

[Mr.  Ballantyne  then  describes  the  experiences  of  the  C.O.'s  at 
Capetown,  and  their  treatment  on  the  Norman  Castle,  after  being 
transferred  to  that  boat.  His  narrative  is  wholly  in  line  with  that  of 
Mr.  Briggs,  and  is  therefore  omitted. — Ed.] 

On  the  last  occasion  on  which  we  were  forcibly  dressed  on  the 
Norman  Castle,  before  reaching  Plymouth,  the  authorities  thought  to 

90 


GARTH  C.  BALLANTYNE. 

make  use  of  the  fact  that  the  ship  was  carrying  a  number  of  first- 
class  passengers,  including  some  ladies.  Accordingly,  we  were 
divested  of  the  shirt  and  singlet,  dressed  in  just  the  trousers  and  tunic, 
and  brought  round  from  behind  the  wheelhouse,  which  had  hitherto 
partly  screened  us,  to  the  forward  end  of  the  poop-deck — into  full 
view  of  the  promenade  deck,  where  some  of  the  passengers  were 
walking  about.  Men  were  placed  to  prevent  us  from  returning,  and 
we  were  released.  Without  any  hesitation  whatever  we  all  stripped 
stark  naked.  We  were  soon  returned  to  our  former  position,  where 
we  obtained  towels,  which  we  put  around  us  as  loin-cloths,  remaining 
in  that  attitre  until  within  a  few  days'  sail  of  Pl>Tnouth,  when  we 
obtained  a  shirt  and  underpants  each,  and  thus  garbed  we  arrived. 

During  the  latter  end  of  the  journey  we  were  returned  to  the 
guardroom;  and  all  through  the  danger  zone  we  were  under  lock  and 
key.  The  sentry  on  the  door  carried  the  key,  which  he  took  with  him 
when  he  accompanied  any  of  us  on  deck  to  the  latrines  or  wash- 
house.  If  any  accidents  had  occurred  during  his  absence,  owing  to 
the  rush  of  men  up  the  stairs,  he  would  have  been  unable  to  return 
to  release  us,  and  we  should  probably  have  been  drowned  like  rats 
in  a  trap.  On  at  least  one  occasion  the  key  was  lost,  and  some  delay 
was  experienced  until  the  carpenter  was  brought  and  the  door  forced. 

At  the  commencement  of  our  journey,  some  of  us  had  told  the  offi- 
cers that  as  they  had  carried  us  aboard  so  they  would  carry  us  off 
again,  and  accordingly  on  arrival  at  Plymouth  we  proceeded  to  keep 
our  promise.  When  the  boat  arrived  in  harbour,  we  were  once  again 
forcibly  dressed  in  uniform  and  dragged  up  the  stairs,  along  the  deck 
and  down  the  gangway  on  to  the  lighter,  and  when  the  lighter  got 
alongside  the  wharf  we  were  dragged  down  the  gangway  on  to  the 
wharf.  Here  eight  of  us  were  dumped  on  to  a  truck  and  wheeled  a 
distance  of  one  hundred  yards  or  so  to  the  train,  which  conveyed  us 
to  Sling  Camp,  on  the  Salisbury  Plain.  Here  we  were  split  up  and 
sent  to  the  guardrooms  of  the  various  camps,  and  I  found  myself  in 
company  with  Briggs  and  Maguire  in  the  guardroom  of  the  Welling- 
ton Camp.  A  row  between  Briggs  and  a  S.M.  resulted  in  our  gettin'C 
no  tea,  and  we  went  to  bed.  On  getting  up  next  morning  we  did  nor 
put  on  the  uniform,  but  remained  in  our  underclothing.  Perceiving 
this  the  provost-sergeant  fetched  about  20  men,  who  forcibly  dressed 
us,  and  placed  us  in  separate  cells,  where  we  immediately  stripped  off 
the  khaki  again.  As  soon  as  this  was  noticed,  we  wore  again  dress- 
ed, and  this  time  we  were  handcuffed  to  prevent  our  removing  the 
unifonn.  For  over  a  fortnight  we  were  thus  dressed  and  handcuffed 
each  morning  and  kept  in  solitary  confinement.  The  authorities  also 
tried  to  put  us  on  bread  and  water,  but  each  time  this  happened  we 
refused  to  eat  anything  at  all,  and  as  they  evidently  did  not  wish  to 
provoke  us  into  hunger-striking  we  were  generally  supplied  with 
fairly  good  food. 

During  this   time  we  were   constantly  visited   by  officers  and   men 

01 


ARMAGEDDON   OR    CALVARY. 

of  every  rank,  who  tried  to  coax,  argue,  or  bully  us  into  doing  work 
of  some  kind,  but  we  refused  even  to  go  out  for  a  walk  in  uniform. 

One  very  high  official  made  himself  particulaiiy  objectionable. 
What  seemed  to  annoy  him  most  was  the  fact  that  we  refused  to 
stand  up  or  to  say  "sir"  when  addressing  him.  He  entered  my  cell 
one  evening  after  I  was  in  bed,  and  asked  me  one  or  two  questions. 
I  answered  him  with  a  plain  "Yes"  or  "No."  "Why  do  you  not  say 
'sir'  when  addressing  me?"  he  asked.  "Would  you  not  say  'sir'  when 
speaking  to  your  employer?"  I  replied  that  I  had  no  objection  to 
saying  "sir"  to  anyone  whom  I  respected,  but  that  as  I  had  no  re- 
spect for  the  rank  he  held  and  that  what  little  I  knew  of  him  as  a 
man  had  not  led  me  to  respect  him,  I  did  not  feel  called  on  to  "sir" 
him. 

As  our  last  sentence  of  28  days'  confinement  received  on  the  boat 
had  now  run  out,  it  was  necessary  that  some  definite  charge  should 
be  laid  against  us  in  order  that  we  might  be  kept  in  the  guardroom. 
Accordingly,  we  were  one  day  ordered  by  an  n.c.o.  in  the  presence  of 
witnesses  to  go  out  on  parade.  This  we  refused  to  do,  and  we  were 
charged  with  refusing  to  obey  an  order  and  were  remanded  by  Colonel 
Saunders  for  courtmartial.  A  "summary  of  evidence"  was  taken,  but 
as  we  were  not  allowed  to  speak  without  punctuating  our  remarks 
with  "sirs,"  we  preferred  to  say  nothing. 

The  officers  now  began  to  get  the  idea  that  there  was  a  ringleader 
among  us,  so  one  night  we  were  separated.  I  was  taken  to  the  Can- 
terbury guardroom.  One  of  the  sergeants  of  this  camp  was  well  hated 
by  all  the  troops  on  account  of  the  severity  with  which  he  treated 
all  prisoners  committed  to  his  charge.  As  soon,  however,  as  I  got  into 
the  cell  I  removed  the  uniform.  Later  in  the  evening,  wishing  to  go 
to  bed,  I  knocked  at  the  door  and  asked  to  be  allowed  to  go  to  the 
latrine.  The  sergeant  opened  the  door,  but  on  seeing  how  I  was 
dressed  refused  to  let  me  out  until  I  put  on  some  more  clothing.  As 
I  refused  to  do  this,  he  closed  the  door  again.  Later  I  informed  him 
that  I  suffered  from  piles,  and  that  unless  he  allowed  me  out  I  would 
be  likely  to  do  myself  an  injury  and  that  I  should  report  the  matter 
to  the  doctor  in  the  morning.  He  then  obtained  assistance,  forcibly 
dressed  me,  dragged  me  outside  and  then  back  again,  knocking  me 
about  pretty  considerably  in  the  process.  He  then  handcuffed  my 
hands  behind  my  back  and  kicked  me  into  the  cell,  leaving  me  thus 
all  night,  so  I  was  tmable  to  make  up  my  bed.  and  the  weather  being 
very  cold,  I  suffered  badly  from  cold  and  got  no  sleep  that  night. 

-Next  morning  bread  and  water  only  was  brought  to  me,  and  I 
icfused  to  eat  it.  Later  in  the  day  I  informed  an  officer  that  as  the 
authorities  did  not  seem  to  be  able  to  make  up  their  minds  what  to 
do  with  us,  and  that  as  my  health  jnust  inevitably  break  down  very 
shortly  under  this  treatment,  I  thought  that  I  might  bring  matters  to 
a  head  by  refusing  to  eat  anything  until  a  more  definite  course  was 

92 


GARTH  C.  BALLANTYNE. 

determined  upon.  All  that  day  and  all  the  next  I  ate  nothing,  al- 
though tempting  dishes  were  placed  before  me  at  each  meal  time. 

The  next  evening  I  was  again  taken  back  to  the  Wellington  Camp, 
where  a  draft  for  Pi-ance  was  drawn  up.  An  escort  was  in  readiness, 
and  I  was  marched  away,  handcuffed,  to  the  train,  which  conveyed 
us  to  Folkestone.  From  there  we  crossed  to  Boulogne,  and  proceeded 
by  motor  lorry  to  the  New  Zealand  Base  at  Etaples. 

On  the  morning  after  my  arrival  there  I  was  interviewed  by 
Colonel  Mitchell,  the  Camp  Commandant.  He  used  all  manner  of  ar- 
guments to  try  and  persuade  me  to  do  work  of  .some  kind,  telling  me 
that  I  should  inevitably  be  shot  if  I  persisted  in  my  refusals  when 
I  was  sent  on  up  the  line.  He  even  went  so  far  as  to  read  to  me 
lists  out  of  General  Routine  Orders  of  men  who  had  been  shot,  to 
show  me  that  shooting  was  not  an  uncommon  thing  in  the  Army.  I 
found  out  that  two  others,  Little  and  Alec.  Baxter,  had  preceded  me 
at  Etaples,  and  on  my  inquiring  as  to  their  whereabouts  Colonel  .Mit- 
chell informed  me  that  they  had  been  sent  up  to  the  front  line,  an  1 
that  if  they  had  not  already  been  shot  they  were  probably  just  wait- 
ing for  the  sentence  to  be  carried  out.  I  replied  that  in  that  case 
further  argument  was  useless.  If  my  friends  were  to  be  shot,  then 
my  place  was  at  their  side,  and  I  asked  to  be  sent  to  join  them. 

I  remained  in  Etaples  about  a  week,  during  which  time,  although  I 
was  kept  in  close  confinement,  I  was  not  ill-treated  in  any  way.  At 
the  end  of  that  time  I  was  escorted  away  with  a  draft  to  the  rein- 
forcement camp,  which  was  then  situated  at  Hazebrouck.  Here  on 
entering  the  guard  tent,  I  was  delighted  to  find  Little  and  Alex.  Baxter, 
looking  in  pretty  good  health.  We  had  intich  to  talk  over,  and  they 
informed  me  that  as  yet  nothing  serious  had  happened  to  them  except 
that  force  had  been  used  to  make  them  go  out  for  a  walk  every  day, 
with  the  equipment  and  ritle  tied  on  to  them,  so  that  they  could  not 
throw  them  off.  I  was  not,  however,  to  enjoy  their  society  for  Innii, 
for  early  next   morning  I   was  shifted  to  another  tamp  near  by. 

Here  I  got  into  trouble  i-ight  away  over  my  food.  I  had  heard 
instructions  given  that  I  wa.s  to  be  treated  the  same  as  ilu  ordinary 
prisoners,  but  when  their  food  was  t)rouglit  the  sergeant  told  nie  that 
he  was  "not  going  to  feich  and  carry  for  tlie  likes  of  me."  and  that  I 
would  have  to  go  on  parade  with  the  other  men  to  L:ei  mine.  I  re- 
plied that  I  would  ]iarade  for  nothinu.  not  even  my  food,  so  I  went 
without  any  that  day.  C)n  the  next  day  lie  came  and  'old  me  that  ho 
was  .uoing  to  take  me  to  the  cookhouse  to  uet  my  diniu  r.  According- 
ly, he  and  another  man  crabbed  hold  of  me  and  took  mo  alon^,  but  J 
refused  to  carry  the  food  iiaek.  wheri'upon  he  tied  m\  hands  to- 
gether, and  tied  iIk^  tea  dixie  to  them.  1  allowed  liim  to  do  this 
quietly,  hut  as  soon  as  he  let  uo  1  uavi  in\  hands  a  jerk  and  spilled 
the  lot.  At  this  he  became  enraued.  and  strtuk  me  in  the  face  with 
his  fist.  1  remained  thus  without  roo(i  or  even  water  for  nearly 
five  days,  steadily  refusing  to  l^o  du  parade  to  obtain  it. 


ARMAGEDDON    OR    CALVARY. 

Each  morning  equipment  was  placed  on  my  shoulders,  and  I  was 
walked  along  the  road  between  two  men  for  about  an  hour  or  so.  On 
the  morning  of  the  fifth  day  I  had  become  so  weak  that  I  think  I  must 
have  fainted,  for  I  could  afterwards  remember  very  little  of  how  I 
got  home  again.  What  would  have  been  the  end  of  this  I  don't  know, 
but  about  this  time  the  camp  was  broken  up,  and  I  again  rejoined 
Little  and  Baxter,  my  food  being  brought  to  me  along  with  theirs. 

In  the  course  of  a  conversation;  the  Adjutant  of  the  camp  told  us 
that  he  could  get  no  satisfactory  instructions  from  the  authorities  as 
to  how  to  deal  with  us,  and  that  they  were  annoyed  with  the  New 
Zealand  Government  for  ever  having  sent  us  to  France  at  all.  In 
order,  therefore,  to  force  Headquarters  to  consider  the  matter  he  in- 
tended giving  us  an  order,  and  if  we  refused  to  obey  it  he  would  re- 
mand us  for  a  Courtmartial. 

Accordingly  a  written  order  was  given  us,  instructing  us  to  parade 
at  a  certain  time,  fully  equipped,  to  proceed  to  join  up  our  units. 
Shortly  before  the  time  an  n.c.o.  warned  us  for  the  parade,  and  we 
informed  him  that  we  did  not  intend  going  on  it,  and  the  time  passetl 
without  our  making  any  attempt  to  do  so.  We  were  subsequently 
brought  before  the  Adjutant  and  remanded  for  a  Field  General  Court- 
martial  on  a  charge  of  refusing  to  obey  an  order  in  a  forward  area. 
We  were  tried  about  a  week  later.  Two  of  the  oflBcers  on  the  Court- 
martial  were  of  the  Imperial  Forces  and  not  New  Zealanders.  I  re- 
fused to  take  any  part  in  the  trial  beyond  handing  in  a  written  state- 
ment, detailing  very  briefly  my  previous  experiences,  a  very  short 
explanation  of  my  position  as  a  CO.,  and  also  giving  as  my  reason 
for  refusing  to  take  part  in  the  trial  the  fact  that  I  did  not  recognise 
the  Court's  right  to  try  me  as  a  soldier,  seeing  that  I  had  not  up  till 
that  time  signed  my  name  to  a  single  document  of  any  kind. 

After  the  trial  I  was  recalled  twice  by  the  President  of  the  Court, 
who  told  me  each  time  that  he  wished  to  give  me  another  opportunity 
to  reconsider  my  decision.  He  said  that  for  the  crime  with  which  I 
was  charged  the  Court  could  probt.bly  bring  in  one  sentence  only — 
that  of  death.  I  replied  that  I  was  fully  aware  of  the  position,  and 
that  the  authorities  had  taken  care  that  I  had  had  plenty  of  solitary 
confinement  in  which  to  fully  consider  the  matter,  and  that  I  was 
prepared  to  stand  by  my  statement,  whatever  the  penalty  imposed  by 
the  Court.  On  being  taken  back  to  camp  after  the  trial  we  were, 
strange  to  say,  given  complete  liberty  to  wander  about  as  we  pleased, 
the  chaplain  even  offering  us  money,  which,  of  course,  we  refused. 
Whether  the  authorities  wished  to  give  us  an  opening  to  get  right  away 
or  to  go  to  one  of  the  neighbouring  villages  and  get  drunk,  and  thus 
incriminate  ourselves  more  definitely,  I  don't  know,  but  none  of  us 
ever  had  any  intention  of  running  away,  and  we  were  all  teetotallers, 
so  that  we  were  not  likely  to  get  into  any  diflBcuIties  in  that  way. 

We  had  some  time  to  wait  for  our  sentences,  and  when  the  New 
Zealand   camp  moved  away   to  another  area   we  were  shifted  to  the 

94 


GARTH  C.  HALLANTYNE. 

reinforcement  camp  of  the  44th  Division  of  the  Imperial  Forces.  Wo 
remained  here  some  time,  until  one  day  our  sentences  were  promul- 
gated before  a  full  battalion  parade,  and  we  found  ourselves  com- 
mitted to  five  years'  penal  servitude.  We  were  then  escorted  to  St. 
Omer,  to  a  receiving  depot  where  prisoners  were  collected  from  the 
surrounding  areas,  and  from  where  they  were  dispatched  in  gangs, 
handcuffed  in  pairs,  and  surrounded  by  armed  guards,  to  the  various 
military  prisons. 

Here  I  intend  going  beyond  just  my  own  personal  experiences  and 
giving  a  description  of  a  British  military  hard  labour  prison  in  France, 
because  I  do  not  thinli  that  there  will  be  published  in  New  Zealand 
many  other  descriptions  of  these  places  written  by  men  with  such 
first-hand  information  as  I  was  able  to  gather  during  my  seven  months' 
imprisonment  in  No.  10  Military  Prison  Camp,  situated  on  the  out- 
skirts of  Dunkirlc. 

This  was  a  hard  labour  prison  for  men  with  sentences  of  over 
three  months,  and  quite  different  from  the  field  punishment  compounds. 
Originally,  most  of  the  men  in  these  prisons  would  be  sentenced  to 
five,  ten,  fifteen  and  twenty  years'  penal  servitude,  but  these  Ion;? 
sentences  were  given  merely  to  frighten  the  rest  of  the  troops  before 
whom  they  would  be  promulgated.  According  to  the  law,  men  could 
not  be  kept  abroad  with  sentences  of  more  than  two  years'  duration, 
so  that  as  soon  as  the  man  arrived  in  prison  his  sentence  was  com- 
muted to  two  years'  hard  labour.  I  would  like  to  point  out  that,  as 
will  be  seen  from  the  number  of  this  prison,  there  were  nine  other 
such  places  in  France,  No.  10  being  the  newest  and  also,  I  believe,  the 
smallest,  although  it  held  about  400  men.  Numbers  of  New  Zealanders 
have  served  sentences  in  these  prisons,  although  they  are  entirely 
under  the  control  of  the  Imperial  authorities,  but  there  would  probably 
be  very  few  who  would  care  to  publish  their  names  in  connection 
with   descriptions  of  them. 

I  would  like  to  make  it  quite  clear,  however,  that  the  majority  of 
these  prisoners  were  not  criminals,  but  had  merely  been  guilty  of 
breaches  of  discipline  or  had  been  absent  without  leave  for  a  short 
time.  It  mu.st  be  remembered  that  offences  which  would  hardly  be 
considered  crimes  in  civilian  life,  or  which  might  be  punished  by  a 
small  fine,  mean  years  of  penal  servitude  in  the  Army.  Tho  (rovornor, 
whenever  he  was  speaking  to  prisoner.'^,  was  always  careful  to  im- 
press on  them  this  fact — that  they  were  not  criminals  and  must  not 
lose  their  self-respect,  that  they  had  merely  been  sent  there  to  be 
taught  discipline:  but  I  do  not  think  that  there  avv  any  criminal 
prisons  in  which  the  men  are  more  harshly  treated,  and  it  seems  to 
me  that  to  learn  discipline  means  to  lose*  all  si^lf-rcsjicct. 

.Many  of  the  warders  in  these  prisons  had  st  rvcd  in  liie  pre-war 
military  prisons  of  England  and  Scotland,  and  most  of  the  rest  were 
old  soldiers,  and  were  therefore  not  likely  to  have  very  sympathetic 
natures    or    troublesome    consciences. 

95 


ARMAGEDDON    OR    CALVARY. 

As  I  have  stated,  after  the  promulgation  of  our  sentences  we  were 
taken  to  a  depot  for  prisoners  at  St.  Omer.  We  were  kept  there  seve- 
ral days,  until  about  30  men  had  arrived,  and  then  very  early  in  the 
morning  we  were  paraded,  handcuffed  in  pairs,  and  marched  away, 
soldiers  with  fixed  bayonets  forming  a  guard  right  around  us.  We 
travelled  by  train  to  Dunkirk,  and  then  formed  up  again,  still  hand- 
cuffed, and  marched  to  the  prison.  As  we  drew  near,  what  struck 
me  first  about  the  place  was  the  unhealthiness  of  its  situation.  The 
ground  was  very  low-lying  and  swampy,  and  there  was  absolutely  no 
protection  from  the  cold  bleak  winds  and  fogs  of  the  Channel.  The 
prison  consisted  of  a  few  corrugated-iron  huts  and  sheds  and  a  num- 
ber of  bell-tents,  the  whole  being  surrounded  by  two  high  barbed-wire 
fences  about  six  feet  apart,  with  sentries  at  intervals  walking  between 
them.  When  we  got  inside  the  prison  I  noticed  that  the  iron  huts 
were  the  warders'  quarters,  the  offices,  cookhouse,  stores,  etc.  All  the 
prisoners  were  quartered  in  the  tents,  about  sixteen  or  eighteen  men 
in  each.  I  also  noticed  two  long  low  iron  sheds,  with  small  windows 
high  up  the  walls,  which  I  was  very  soon  to  find  out  contained  the 
punishment  cells. 

The  idea  of  the  warders  seemed  to  be  to  "cow  down"  every  new 
prisoner  from  the  start,  and  so,  for  the  first  hour  or  so,  we  were 
rushed  about,  yelled  at,  bullied,  and  had  all  manner  of  threats  and 
warnings  hurled  at  us  if  we  did  not  jump  about  and  look  alive.  We 
were  searched  and  then  taken  to  have  a  bath.  The  prison  was  at  this 
time  not  properly  completed,  and  so  the  thirty  of  us  were  given  two 
small  tubfuls  of  lukewarm  water  to  wash  in.  As  this  was  in  the  be- 
ginning of  December,  the  weather  was  pretty  cold,  and  we  had  all 
been  wearing  heavy  woollen  underclothing;  but  we  were  told  that  as 
there  was  no  more  underclothing  in  the  prison  to  replace  our  own 
when  dirty  the  sooner  we  got  used  to  being  without  underclothing 
the  better,  and  so  our  underpants  and  undershirts  were  taken  away 
from  us. 

We  three  C.O.'s  were  in  trouble  as  soon  as  we  got  into  the  office, 
for  we  refused  to  sign  the  books.  A  warder  then  took  us  on  one  side 
and  asked  us  whether  we  were  going  to  work.  We  replied  that  wo 
did  not  intend  to.  and  we  were  taken  away  and  locked  up  in  the  cells. 
Next  morning  we  were  brought  out  and  definitely  ordered  to  work,  but 
we  refused,  and  were  returned  to  the  cells.  The  Governor  sentenced 
us  to  what  was  known  in  the  prison  as  "three  threes,"  which  meant 
three  days'  solitary  confinement,  three  days'  bread  and  water,  and 
three  days'  No.  1  Field  Punishment,  the  sentences  running  concur- 
rently.   We  were  placed  in  separate  cells. 

At  7  o'clock  in  the  morning  we  were  given  8oz.  of  dry  bread  and  a 
drink  of  water.  At  8  o'clock  our  hands  were  handcuffed  behind  our 
backs  with  figure-eight  handcuffs.  Now,  ordinary  handcuffs  have  two 
links  and  a  swivel  between  them,  thus  allowing  a  fair  amount  of 
freedom   of   movement.      In    figure-eight    handcuffs,  however,    the   two 

96 


GARTH  (\  BALLANTYNE. 

loops  are  solid  in  one  piece,  so  that  with  these  on  behind  our  backs 
our  whole  wrists,  arms  and  shoulders  were  rendered  almost  immov- 
able. Field  Punishment  No.  1  means  having  these  on  for  12  hours  in 
the  day.  We  were  given  nothing  further  to  eat  until  5  o'clock  in  the 
evening — ten  hours  since  our  last  meal— when  another  8oz.  of  dry- 
bread  and  some  water  were  brought  us,  and  in  order  that  we  might 
eat  it  our  hands  were  moved  from  behind  to  in  front  of  us,  to  be  re- 
turned, however,  behind  us  as  soon  as  we  had  finished  eating  and  left 
there  until  8  o'clock  in  the  evening. 

The  cells  in  which  we  were  confined  were  very  small,  barely  seven 
feet  square  by  eight  feet  high;  the  walls  and  roof  were  corrugated  Iron 
and  the  floor  concrete.  Outside  the  ground  was  covered  with  snow, 
and  inside  the  iron  walls  and  ceiling  were  dripping  with  frost.  Durin,; 
the  first  morning  I  sat  down  on  the  floor  to  rest  my  legs,  but  I  rapidly 
became  so  cold  and  stiff  that  without  the  help  of  my  hands  I  had  tKe 
greatest  diflBculty  in  getting  on  my  feet  again.  This  was  a  lesson  to 
me,  and  during  the  remainder  of  my  punishment  I  walked  from  cor- 
ner to  corner  of  my  cell,  three  short  strides  each  way,  for  the  full  12 
hours  each  day.  My  arms  and  shoulders  ached  almost  intolerably, 
and  became  so  numbed  with  cold  that  when  the  handcuffs  were  re- 
moved they  hung  powerless  at  my  sides.  For  weeks  and  weeks  after- 
wards I  felt  the  effects  of  this  punishment  in  my  arms. 

This  much  was  the  authorised  punishment,  but  during  the  time 
that  a  prisoner  was  in  the  cells  he  was  in  the  hands  of  the  warder 
in  charge,  who  administered  by  kicks  and  blows  such  punishments 
as  he  deemed  necessary  for  the  "maintenance  of  good  order  and  dis- 
cipline in  the  cells."  Generally,  when  a  prisoner  was  sent  to  the  cells 
for  punishment  he  was  first  taken  into  a  cell,  stripped  naked,  and 
sometimes  handcuffed;  then  the  warder  would  proceed  to  administer 
a  sound  thrashing,  using  both  his  hands  and  feet,  one  warder  during 
his  turn  in  charge  of  the  cells  going  so  far  as  to  use  a  heavy  leather 
belt.  Then,  when  the  prisoner  was  beginning  to  get  groggy,  buckets 
of  freezing  cold  water  would  be  thrown  over  him  to  revive  him,  and 
finally  he  would  be  given  a  bucket  and  cloth  and  be  told  to  dry  up 
his  cell  before  he  would  be  given  back  his  clothes.  Often  the  bumps 
and  thuds  of  the  poor  prisoner  against  the  iron  walls  and  his  yells 
and  cries  for  mercy  could  be  heard  all  over  the  compound. 

The  next  form  of  punishment  we  experienced  was  shot  drill.  This 
is  an  old  form  of  punishment,  abolished  years  ago  in  the  navy  as  being 
inhuman.  It  is  still  good  enough,  however,  for  our  up-to-date  mili- 
tary prisons.  The  shot  in  this  case  consisted  of  a  round  bag  of  about 
9  inches  in  diameter,  filled  with  sand,  and  supposed  to  weigh  281b., 
although  when  the  sand  became  wet  it  was  usually  heavier.  To  do 
the  drill  the  prisoner  stands  with  the  shot  between  his  feet.  The 
warder  stand.s  with  a  whistle,  and  in  time  to  his  blasts  the  prisoner 
first  bends  down,  picks  up  the  shot,  and  balances  it  on  the  palms  )t 
his  hands  in  front  of  himself;  then,  on  the  next  whistle  he  takes  three 
4  97 


ARMAGEDDON   OR   CALVARY. 

quick  steps  forward,  on  the  following  whistle  placing  it  down  between 
his  feet  again  and  standing  up  straight;  then  down,  up,  three  paces 
forward,  down;  and  so  on  for  perhaps  an  hour,  with  only  one  or  two 
short  rests  of  a  few  minutes.  Each  movement  has  to  be  made  dis- 
tinctly and  sharply,  and  the  warder's  whistle  is  generally  just  a  bit 
ahead  each  time,  so  that  the  prisoner  has  to  go  his  hardest  in  order  to 
keep  up.  It  is,  in  fact,  just  an  ingenious  device  to  tax  absolutely  the 
man's  strength  to  the  utmost.  The  effect  I  found  was  to  make  me 
horribly  giddy  and  to  produce  terrible  pains  in  my  back  and  forearms. 
This  punishment  was  often  given  in  conjunction  with  No.  1  Field  Pun- 
ishment. 

The  prisoner  sentenced  to  No.  1  Field  Punishment  was  stood  with 
his  back  to  a  post,  and  his  hands  handcuffed  behind  the  post,  and  he 
was  held  practically  immovable  by  three  straps,  one  around  his  chest, 
another  around  his  knees,  and  the  other  around  his  ankles.  I  have 
seen  men  kept  thus  in  driving  snow  and  sleet  for  two  hours,  and 
when  released  they  could  scarcely  stand.  They  would  then  almost 
immediately  be  put  on  to  shot  drill  "to  loosen  their  joints." 

About  this  time  Little,  Baxter  and  myself  managed  to  have  a  bit 
of  a  consultation,  and  as  a  result  we  decided  that  we  would  work,  see- 
ing that  the  majority  of  the  work  done  by  the  prisoners  consisted  in 
the  construction  of  protections  against  air  raids.  On  our  making  our 
decision  known,  we  were  sent  out  to  live  in  the  tents,  the  authorities, 
however,  taking  the  precaution  to  put  us  each  into  separate  section 
of  the  prison,  so  that  from  this  onwards  we  saw  very  little  of  each 
other. 

I  had  now  a  better  opportunity  of  observing  the  general  conditions 
of  the  prison.  Rather  naturally  I  suppose,  one  of  the  first  things  that 
claimed  my  attention  was  the  food  supply.  The  rations  I  found  were 
as  follows: — Breakfast:  1  pint  of  pretty  thin  gruel  without  milk  or 
sugar  and  very  often  without  even  salt,  8oz.  bread,  2oz.  dripping,  and 
2oz.  cheese.  Lunch:  8oz.  bread  and  4oz.  bully-beef.  Tea:  8oz.  bread 
and  1  pint  of  soup,  in  which  (if  one  was  lucky)  there  might  be  a 
piece. of  fat  meat  or  a  potato.  This,  I  found  to  be  very  poor  fare  for 
men  working  long  hours  at  hard  manual  labour  in  a  bitterly  cold 
climate.  In  fact,  the  men  became  so  ravenously  hungry  that  it  was 
no  uncommon  thing,  when  they  happened  to  be  working  at  the 
R.X.A.E.  aerodrome  or  any  of  the  other  camps  around  the  prison,  and 
could  get  near  the  cookhouse,  to  see  them  sneaking  over  to  the  swill 
tub  and  diving  into  it  for  pieces  of  stale  bread  or  a  bone  with  meat  on 
it,  and  then  literally  pushing  it  down  their  throats  so  as  to  get  it 
eaten  before  the  warder  might  catch  sight  of  them.  What  troubled  me 
most  was  the  lack  of  a  hot  drink  of  any  sort.  All  we  were  given  to 
drink  was  cold  water,  and  as  this  was  contained  in  a  bucket  placed 
out  in  the  open  it  often  became  frozen,  and  it  was  necessary  to  break 
The   \rv  on    top   to   get   a   drink. 

Th(    daily  routine  of  the  prison  was  as  follows: — Reveille  at  5.30 

98 


GARTTT  C.  BALLANTYNE. 

a.m.  At  a  quarter  to  6  the  gates  of  the  various  sections  of  the  prisdiis 
were  opened  and  the  men  marched  out  with  their  towels  to  wash.  Now, 
the  wash-house  would  accommodate  only  about  40  or  50  men  at  a  time, 
so  that  it  was  necessary  to  go  through  in  sections,  and  it  would  tak'i 
about  half  an  hour  for  the  400  odd  men  to  go  through.  On  this 
parade  we  were  not  allowed  to  wear  coats,  and,  as  I  mentioned  before, 
we  had  no  underclothing,  so  that  we  had  to  go  out  in  just  a  shirt 
.and  trousers,  very  often  with  the  snow  lying  thick  on  the  ground 
and  a  cold  bleak  wind  blowing  in  from  the  Channel,  and  at  that  time 
of  the  year  it  would  be  still  quite  dark.  The  time  during  which  we 
were  waiting  to  go  in  to  wash  would  be  occupied  with  perhaps  a  little 
physical  training  or  we  would  be  made  to  double  round  and  round  the 
square.  The  first  ones  to  wash  would  not  be  allowed  to  return  to 
their  tents  until  all  had  finished.  In  the  wash-house  the  water  in 
the  taps  was  very  often  frozen,  so  that  the  basins  were  filled  the  day 
before.  In  the  morning,  to  use  the  water,  the  ice  on  the  top  would 
have  to  be  broken,  and  as  the  water  could  not  be  renewed  five  or  six 
men  would  have  to  wash  in  each  basin  of  water.  When  all  had  finished 
the  men  would  return  to  their  tents,  being  handed  breakfast  as  they 
went  in.  After  breakfast  every  man  had  to  shave  every  day.  As  it 
was  against  the  rules  for  any  man  to  have  any  edged  tools  in  his  pos- 
session, we  could  not  each  keep  our  own  razors.  About  si.x  razors 
and  brushes  were  placed  in  each  tent  every  morning  and  collected 
up  again  after  they  were  finished  with.  The  razors  were  supposed  to 
be  kept  in  order  by  the  barber,  as  we  had  no  strops  on  which  to 
sharpen  them  ourselves,  but  as  the  razors  were  only  very  poor  issue 
ones  to  start  with,  and  as  tliere  were  about  300  to  do,  the  state  they 
were  in  can  well  be  imagined.  Shaving  with  such  razors,  water  that 
was  near  freezing,  ordinary  common  yellow  soap  and  no  glass  was 
indeed  a  ticklish  operation.  Just  before  I  came  out  an  attempt  was 
being  made  to  give  each  man  his  own  razor,  but  it  was  not  succeeding 
too  well.  After  breakfast,  w^e  were  paraded  on  the  square  and  in- 
spected by  the  Governor.  (I  have  seen  men  sent  off  this  parade  be- 
cause they  were  not  looking  too  clean — and  it  is  hardly  surprising 
under  the  circumstances  that  such  cases  were  sometimes  found — and 
afterwards  stripped  and  scrubbed  with  an  ordinary  floor  scrubbing- 
brush  in  cold  water  until  the  blood  was  running  from  them.)  After 
that  we  were  told  off  into  workiiii;  parties  and  marched  away  to  our 
work,  which,  as  I  have  oxi)laincd,  consisted  for  the  greater  part  in 
the  building  of  duu-outs  and  protections  against  air  raids.  In  the 
winter  we  stopped  work  in  time  to  he  back  in  the  prison  just  before 
dark,  and  as  the  day.s  grew  longer  we  worked  later,  until  we  could 
work  until  G.:"!0,  which  was  the  usual  knock-off  time  during  the  sum- 
mer. 

It  was  not  customary  to  stop  work  for  liad  weather.  All  through 
the  winter  we  worked,  hail,  rain  or  snow;  and  often  when  we  got 
back  to  prison  our  boot-!,  socks  and  clothini;  would  he  wet  through.  We 


ARMAGEDDON   OR   CALVARY. 

had  no  chance  of  drying  them  or  of  obtaining  fresh  ones,  so  it  was 
just  a  case  of  turn  into  bed  to  keep  warm.  I  found  that  I  had  to  place 
my  socks  between  the  blankets  under  me  to  keep  them  from  freezing 
stiff  during  the  night. 

We  worked  seven  days  a  week,  no  distinction  being  made  for  Sun- 
day; in  fact,  no  distinction  was  made  for  Christmas  or  New  Year.    We 
worked  all  Christmas  Day  in  a  blinding  snowstorm,  and  had,  if  any- 
thing, rather  worse  food  than  usual.     I  do  not  think  that  many  of  , 
the  prisoners  will  ever  forget  Christmas,  1917-18. 

If  you  had  gone  to  the  majority  of  these  prisoners  and  asked  what 
they  most  desired,  in  ninety-nine  cases  out  of  a  hundred  you  would 
have  got  the  answer:  "A  good  feed  and  then  some  cigarettes."  Nearly 
every  soldier  is  an  inveterate  smoker,  and  short  of  actual  physical 
torture  the  greatest  hardship  that  can  be  put  on  him,  especially  under 
trying  circumstances,  is  to  cut  off  his  supply  of  smokes.  So  great  did 
the  craving  for  tobacco  become  with  some  of  the  prisoners  that  I 
hav^  seen  them  picking  up  dirty  cigarette  butts  off  the  road  and  chew- 
ing them,  and  it  was  a  very  common  practice  to  gather  up  the  butts, 
unravel  them,  and  remake  them  in  pieces  of  newspaper  or  anything 
else  that  was  handy.  A  certain  amount  of  tobacco  was  smuggled  into 
the  prison,  in  spite  of  the  fact  that  every  man  was  searched  every 
night  and  that  the  discovery  of  even  a  trace  would  mean  days  of 
solitary  confinement,  etc. 

The  general  health  of  the  men  in  the  prison  was  certainly  bad. 
Practically  all  looked  emaciated  and  were  suffering  from  chronic 
diarrhoea  as  a  result,  I  think,  of  drinking  too  much  ice  water.  It 
was  no  use  parading  sick  for  this  complaint,  as  the  general  cure  was 
to  put  the  patient  into  solitary  confinement  and  starve  him  until  he 
was  better.  Boils  were  also  common.  Soon  after  I  went  into  the 
prison  my  hands  became  badly  chapped,  my  left  hand  swelled  up  and 
then  cracked,  forming  running  sores  which  I  did  not  get  healed  for 
over  two  months.  Every  night  I  had  to  go  on  sick  parade  to  get  it 
dressed,  and  this  meant,  perhaps,  standing  for  anything  up  to  an  hour 
in  the  snow  outside  the  medical  hut  waiting  my  turn  to  go  in.  How 
this  treatment  did  not  kill  some  of  the  men  who  were  there  through 
illness  used  to  be  a  constant  source  of  wonder  to  me.  Although  both 
my  hands  were  wrapped  up  in  bandages,  I  was  not  during  a  single 
hour  excused  duty,  but  had  to  carry  on  my  work  just  the  same.  I  was 
not  even  allowed  warm  water  to  wash  in,  although  the  placing  of  my 
hands  whilst  in  this  condition  in  very  cold  water  caused  me  extreme 
pain.  Later  on,  one  of  my  heels  got  frostbitten  also,  and  I  was  un- 
able to  put  on  a  boot  for  over  a  fortnight.  During  this  time  I  was 
put  to  work  in  the  tailors'  shop  darning  socks.  Probably  neither  my 
hands  nor  my  heel  would  have  got  better  until  the  weather  had  got 
warmer  had  not  my  health  completely  broken  down  about  the  end 
of  March,  and  I  was  sent  away  to  hospital  for  two  weeks. 

Skin  diseases  of  variou.s  sorts  were  also  very  common,  especially 

100 


ClARTir  C.  BALLANTYNE. 

what  is  known  as  impetigo.  Twice  during  my  imprisonment  my  faco 
was  covered  with  the  mattery  sores  of  this  complaint,  which  was 
doubtless  spread  about  by  the  razors  and  shaving  brushes. 

It  was  seldom  that  a  man  could  get  any  satisfaction  by  going  on 
sick  parade  if  he  was  not  feeling  well,  for  to  be  marked  light  duty 
meant  to  be  worked  harder  than  usual.  The  commonest  occupation 
for  sick  men  marked  "light  duty"  was  wheeling  barrows  full  of  sand 
into  the  prison  to  make  paths  and  form  the  parade  ground. 

The  bathing  accommodation  would  have  been  fairly  satisfactory 
had  sufficient  time  been  allowed  to  use  it  properly,  but  usually  the 
warder  in  charge  would  be  in  a  hurry  to  get  finished  with  his  job, 
and  he  would  rush  the  men  through  without  giving  time  to  have  a 
decent  wash.  The  supposedly  clean  clothing  issued  to  us  was  gen- 
erally in  a  shocking  state.  There  was  no  reason  why  in  a  place  like 
that  proper  fumigation  should  not  be  carried  out  and  lice  practicalfy 
eliminated,  but  the  clothes  were  in  such  a  bad  state  that  almost  every 
man  was  crawling  alive. 

Of  recreation  for  the  prisoners  there  was  absolutely  none.  No 
books  or  papers  of  any  sort  were  allowed.  Sundays  were  passed  the 
same  as  every  other  day  in  work;  there  was  no  chance  of  a  rest. 
A  chaplain  used  to  come  every  second  Thursday,  and  in  order  that 
his  coming  should  not  interrupt  work  the  service  was  held  at  7 
o'clock  in  the  morning.  I  think  most  of  the  prisoners  looked  forward 
to  the  service,  as  it  was  a  change  from  the  deadly  monotony  of  the 
prison  routine,  and  a  good  many  enjoyed  "having  a  sing"  in  the  hymn.T. 
It  was  a  very  noticeable  fact,  however,  that  although  a  fair  volume  of 
sound  .was  produced  in  the  hymns,  "God  save  the  King"  was  usuallv 
a  duet  for  the  chaplain  and  the  regimental  sergeant-major. 

The  prisoners  were  allowed  to  receive  all  letters  that  came  for 
them,  but  were  only  allowed  to  write  once  a  month,  and  then  under 
such  heavy  censorship  that  beyond  a  remark  or  two  on  the  state  of 
the  writer's  health  nothing  further  could  be  said,  and  even  that  was 
liable  to  censorship  if  the  report  was  not  good.  It  is  a  remarkable 
fact,  however,  that  although  my  mother  wrote  every  mail  to  me,  I 
did  not  receive  any  word  from  New  Zealand  at  all  for  nearly  twelve 
months — until  after  I  had  consented  to  come  out  of  prison  and  do 
medical  work,  and  then  the  whole  lot  (over  twenty  in  number)  were 
given  me  at  once.  There  were  also  some  letters  of  mine  to  my  mother 
which  never  arrived. 

It  was  hardly  to  he  wondered  at  that,  under  the  circumstances, 
the  men  in  the  prisons  became  very  irritable  and  bad-tempered.  In 
fact,  every  bad  trait  in  their  character  was  here  given  an  opportunity 
to  develop,  for  the  whole  conditions  encouraged  meanness  and  de- 
ceitfulness,  encouraged  the  men  to  shirk  on  their  mates,  and  so  to 
distrust  and  become  suspicious  of  each  other.  Many  were  the  quarrels 
I  saw  over  the  cutting  up  of  rations,  for  each  man  suspected  that 
his   mates    would    do   him    nut    of   his    fair   share    if   they    got   half  the 

101 


ARMAGEDDON   OR   CALVARY. 

chance;  and  so  woe  betide  anyone  who  cut  up  the  bread  before  every- 
one was  there  to  see  it  done,  and  then  each  man  took  his  turn  to  cut 
it  up,  and,  by  mutual  consent,  he  always  took  the  last,  and,  conse- 
quently, the  smallest  piece  left,  so  that  he  would  be  sure  to  divide  it 
evenly.  It  was  quite  an  exception  to  find  a  man  who  had  suflBcient 
will  power  and  control  of  himself  to  maintain  his  equanimity,  and  I 
frankly  admit  that  towards  the  end,  in  spite  of  the  fact  that  I  was 
fully  aware  of  the  danger,  I  was  always  losing  my  self-control. 

It  is  inevitable  that  wherever  large  bodies  of  men  are  gathered  to- 
gether there  will  always  be  found  a  certain  number  who  are  below 
the  average  in  intelligence — just  a  bit  "dopey,"  as  they  are  usually 
called  in  the  Army,  and  I  think  it  is  an  extremely  regrettable  thing 
that  many  such  men  were  placed  in  the  Army,  where  individuality  is 
not  taken  into  account,  and  so  they  get  into  trouble  often  through  no 
other  reason  than  their  lack  of  intelligence  to  understand  their  posi- 
tion. Many  of  these  men  found  their  way  into  such  places  as  Dun- 
kirk Prison,  and  then  it  was  a  case  of  "God  have  mercy  on  them," 
fof  the  warders  and  other  prisoners  would  not.  Weaklings,  who  with 
careful  and  proper  tuition,  become  fairly  useful  citizens  in  some 
cases,  became  battered  derelicts  verging  on  lunacy. 

I  shall  never  forget  the  case  of  one  young  chap,  scarcely  more 
than  a  boy  he  looked.  His  life  had  been  made  so  hard  for  him  in 
the  Army,  that,  thinking  to  escape,  he  had  one  day  placed  his  hanJ 
on  the  rail  in  front  of  the  wheel  of  a  slowly-moving  truck,  and  had 
allowed  it  to  remain  there  until  the  wheel  passed  over  it,  badly 
crushing  the  wrist.  Unluckily  for  him,  the  doctors  had  fixed  it  up 
fairly  well,  although  it  still  was  very  mis-shapen,  and  then  he  had 
been  sent  to  prison  as  punishment  for  a  self-inflicted  wound.  There 
he  was  the  butt  of  every  warder  and  the  joke  of  almost  every 
prisoner.  What  little  intelligence  he  had  was  slowly  but  surely 
driven  out  of  him.  I  had  befriended  him  a  little,  and  he  used  to 
come  to  me  with  such  questions  as  to  what  would  happen  to  him  if 
he  were  to  eat  sand,  would  it  kill  him  or  only  make  him  ill?  and 
really  I  sometimes  had  hardly  the  heart  to  dissuade  him  from  such 
a  means  of  ending  his  misery.     His  was  by  no  means  an  isolated  case. 

In  spite  of  the  severity  of  the  punishment  for  the  offence,  attempts 
to  escape  were  fairly  common.  During  the  time  I  was  there  some 
fifty  odd-prisoners  made  bids  for  their  freedom.  Nearly  all  got  clear 
away  from  the  prison,  but  I  can  only  remember  three  cases  in  which 
they  were  not  caught  after  a  short  time.  Escapees,  on  being  returned 
to  the  prison,  were  immediately  leg-ironed.  The  irons  were  rivetted 
on  each  leg,  and  the  connecting  chain,  which  was  about  three  feet 
long,  was  looped  up  to  the  belt,  so  that  the  man  could  walk,  but  with 
a  slightly-restricted  stride.  The  usual  punishment  consisted  of  four- 
teen days'  solitary  confinement,  during  which  the  prisoner  would  bo 
handcuffed  with  figure-eight  handcuffs,  and  would  be  on  bread  and 
water  diet  three  days  out  of  five.      Then  there  would  be  twenty-eight 

102 


(JARTIT  C.  BALLANTYNE. 

days  of  No.  1  Field  Punishment  and  shot  drill  on  what  was  called 
No.  2  diet,  which  consisted  of  porridge  and  dry  bread  for  breakfast, 
dry  bread  for  lunch,  and  porridge  and  potatoes  for  tea.  Then  would 
follow  a  further  twenty-eight  days  still  on  No.  2  diet,  during  which 
the  prisoner  would  still  wear  the  leg  irons,  and  would  be  put  to  work 
around  the  prison.  As  the  irons  were  rivetted  on  they  could  not  be 
removed  at  nights,  and  specially-made  clothes  with  buttons  the  full 
length  of  the  outside  of  the  legs  had  to  be  worn  to  enable  the  man  to 
undress. 

It  must  not  be  thought  either  that  by  going  to  prison  soldiers  would 
escape  entirely  the  dangers  of  war,  for  Dunkirk  was  the  most  air- 
raided  town  of  either  France  or  Britain.  Just  before  I  went  there 
the  Germans  had  dropped  leaflets  warning  all  the  inhabitants  to 
evacuate  it,  as  they  intended  levelling  it  to  the  ground,  and  for 
several  months  afterwards  every  fine  night  there  would  be  aeroplanes 
overhead  bombing,  and  although  they  did  not  succeed  in  fully  carry- 
ing out  their  intentions,  there  was  scarcely  a  street  in  the  tow.i 
which  did  not  show  the  effects  of  the  bombs,  and  an  aerodrome  not 
half  a  mile  from  the  prison  was  twice  destroyed. 

Over  a  fairly  lengthy  period  also  the  town  was  continually  shelled 
by  long-range  guns  from  the  fand,  and  was  twice  bombarded  from  the 
sea.  Although  the  prisoners  constructed  huge  and  practically  bomb- 
proof dug-outs  at  various  camps  round  about,  those  for  their  own  use 
were  of  the  most  meagre  description  and  would  scarcely  have  stopped 
an  anti-aircraft  "dudd,"  let  alone  a  bomb. 

To  return  to  myself  and  my  two  companions.  In  one  or  two  talks 
which  we  had  managed  to  get  together,  we  had  summed  up  the  posi- 
tion as  follows: We  had  successfully  defied  the  military  authorities. 
They  had  threatened  to  shoot  us  if  they  could  not  make  soldiers  of 
us.  We  had  deliberately  placed  ourselves  in  such  a  position  by  the 
disobedience  of  orders  that  had  we  been  ordinary  soldiers  we  would 
certainly  have  been  shot,  and  the  authorities  had  merely  sent  xis  to 
prison,  thus  proving  that  their  threats  had  been  bluff  and  that  they 
dared  not  shoot  ns.  We  had  also  heard  through  different  New  Zea- 
land soldiers  that  owing  to  the  stand  made  by  the  fourteen  deported 
men  and  the  outcry  which  their  deportation  had  caused,  the, Govern- 
ment had  decided  not  to  send  any  more  men  out  of  the  country  against 
their  will,  so  that  we  now  came  to  the  conclusion  the  matter  was 
pui'ely  a  personal  one  as  to  what  our  future  movements  should  be. 

I  gave  the  matter  very  long  and  careful  consideration.  On  the 
one  hand,  we  had  become  fairly  accustomed  to  the  prison,  and  with 
the  approaching  summer  weather  a  great  deal  of  the  hardship  would 
disappear,  so  that  piovided  my  health  had  stood  the  strain,  and  that 
was  doubtful  seeing  that  although  I  am  just  on  six  foot  tall,  when  I 
weighed  myself  shortly  after  my  release  I  was  only  9st.  121b.  fully 
clothed.  I  could  have  stayed  on  there  uniil  the  end  of  the  war.  On 
the   other   hand.    I    had    hoard    a   great   deal    about    the  war   from   the 

103 


ARMAGEDDON   OR    CALVARY. 

soldiers,  but  I  felt  that,  in  my  anti-militarist  work  in  the  future,  if 
I  was  able  to  gain  the  knowledge  first  hand,  how  much  stronger  I 
would  be  able  to  make  my  testimony.  I  also  felt  that  by  going  into 
the  front  line  and  by  there  carrying  out  my  work  at  least  as  well  as 
the  average  soldier,  I  would  silence  that  taunt  which  was  so  often 
being  thrown  at  me,  that  I  had  refused  military  service  because  I  was 
afraid.  So  that,  much  as  I  disliked  placing  myself  under  the  control 
of  the  military  authorities,  when  a  letter  came,  to  me  from  Colonel 
Mitchell  offering  to  obtain  my  release  on  condition  that  I  undertook 
medical  work,  I  replied  that  I  was  ready  to  do  so,  provided  that  I  was 
not  asked  to  take  the  oath.  My  companions  had  also  decided  on  a 
similar  course,  and,  following  on  a  visit  to  the  prison  by  Colonel 
Mitchell,  we  were  released  on  June  18,  1918.  Two  days  after  release 
Baxter  reported  sick,  and  was  sent  to  England  with  rheumatic  fever, 
contracted  by  exposure  and  hardship  in  the  prison.  After  a  short  course 
of  instruction  in  medical  work  at  the  base  camp.  Little  and  I  were  sent 
up  the  line  as  regimental  stretcher-bearers.  Unfortunately,  Little 
was  wounded  on  our  second  day  in  the  line,  and  died  at  the  casualty 
clearing  station.  I  remained  at  this  work  until  the  Armistice  was 
signed,  and  then  went  to  Germany  with  the  army  of  occupation  doing 
medical  work  in  the  regimental  aid  post. 

(Signed)   GARTH  C.  BALLANTYNE. 


XVIII.— PRISONERS  OF  CONSCIENCE. 

The  wholesale  jailing  of  Conscientious  Objectors  proceeded  apace, 
both  before  and  after  the  deportations,  until  at  last  between  300  and 
400  New  Zealand  men — many  of  them  with  wives  and  very  young 
children  depending  upon  them — were  held  under  lock  and  key.  It  is 
safe  to  say  that  far  more  men  were  required  to  look  after  the  C.O.'s 
than  the  imprisoned  men  numbered.  So  that  the  prisoning  of  the 
C.O.'s  was  not  only  wrong  from  a  moral  viewpoint,  but  essentially 
stupid  from  a  military  viewpoint. 

To  the  following  sentences  must  be  added,  in  a  great  many  cases, 
additional  sentences  of  28  days  in  the  detention  barracks.  Some 
of  the  men  served  two  such  sentences  before  reaching  the  civil 
prison;  and  the  list  herewith  is  only  of  sentences  served  in  civil 
prisons.  Thus  the  sentences  inflicted  on  the  New  Zealand  C.O.'s  for 
refusing  military  service  ranged  from  one  to  four,  a  large  number 
of  the  victims  serving  three  sentences.  This  list  is  by  no  means 
a  complete  record  of  the  men  whose  possession  of  a  conscience  won 
for  them  a  prison  experience.  It  does  not  include  the  Maori  Objec- 
tors, whose  names   I  have  not  been  able  to  obtain;    nor  yet  does  ii 

104 


PRISONERS  OF  (JONSCIHNCE. 

include  all  the  Europeans.  Still,  it  is  formidable  enough  to  furnish 
a  warning  for  all  New  Zealanders  as  to  the  menace  of  an  intensified 
and  intolerant  militarism:  — 

EIGHTY-FOUR  DAYS  AND  DEPORTED.— Socialist  Objectors:  F. 
Adin,  W.  Little,  Mark  Briggs,  H.  Patton.  Religious  Objectors:  Garth 
C.  Ballantyne  (also  Socialist),  A.  E.  Sanderson,  L.  Penwrlght,  T.  P. 
Harland,  D.  R.  Gray.  Pacifist  Objectors:  A.  McC.  L.  Baxter,  Alex. 
Baxter,  J.  Baxter.     Irish  Objectors:   D.  Maguire,  L.  J.  Kirwan. 

EIGHTY-FOUR  DAYS.— W.  Staff. 

SIX  MONTHS.— Egerton  Gill   (Religious). 

NINE  MONTHS.— G.  A.  Jennings,  J.  Gribble. 

TEN  MONTHS.— J.  M.  Hankers,  W.  J.  Wild. 

ELEVEN  MONTHS.— Hugh  Baxter  (Pacifist),  H.  Bland  (Religious), 
P.  Cody  (Irish),  P.  Dixon  (Religious),  J.  T.  Hogan  (Religious),  R. 
Hopkins,  C.  Goodson  (Socialist),  H.  R.  Urquhart  (Religious),  F.  Gunh 
(Socialist),  F.  Lamb  (Religious  and  Socialist),  R.  P.  Knape  (Socialist), 
T.  Kells  (Religious),  H.  Smith  (Religious),  Wall,  Walsh,  F.  Rogerson 
(Socialist).  Mr.  Urquhart  also  served  a  sentence  of  one  year  under  the 
War  Regulations  (Sedition)  Act. 

ONE  YEAR.— C.  E.  Warden  (Religious  and  Socialist),  Arthur  Bor- 
rows (Socialist),  W.  Hall,  W.  H.  Jones  (Socialist),  A.  Gunn  (Socialist), 
P.  Gunn  (Socialist),  Noel  Goldsbury  (Religious),  Roy  Brady  (Social- 
ist), G.  Wears  Samms  (Socialist),  James  H.  Roberts  (Socialist),  Pren- 
dergast,  Richard  Goode. 

ONE  YEAR  AND  ELEVEN  MONTHS.— P.  R.  Clayton  (Religious), 
F.  G.  Herbert,  A.  Parsons,  W.  Maddern,  D.  H.  Day,  J.  Stubberfields, 
James  Walker  (Religious),  S.  E.  Salter  (Religious),  A.  J.  Oston 
(Socialist),  S.  R.  Doming,  F.  Sumner. 

TWO  YEARS.— Socialist  Objectors:  H.  Bryant,  Norman  Bell 
(Christian),  Frank  Robinson,  D.  T.  Sullivan,  G.  E.  Quartermain, 
Frank  Carroll,  Charles  Fox,  W.  E.  Robinson,  F.  J.  Gavin,  J.  S.  Mc- 
Donald, D.  Gunn,  Robt.  J.  Gould,  G.  Carian,  A.  Bradley.  W.  G.  Gray,  E. 
R.  Williams,  W.  Yeomans,  Henry  Moffatt,  H.  Wilson,  J.  Saunders,  R. 
Tarbutt,  J.  F.  Patterson,  A.  Sherrock,  H.  Campbell,  Wni.  Worrall, 
P.  C.  Webb,  M.P.,  T.  Ivogan,  Alex.  May,  J.  K.  Worrall,  L.  J.  Woods, 
C.  Robertson,  Howard  Hopkins,  Barroclough,  A.  Fraser,  A.  Hardin.r<, 
W.  White,  J.  Calpin,  A.  Fraser,  H.  R.  Gray,  W.  H.  Haydon,  M.  Kelson. 
F.  A.  Macrae,  Jeffreys.  Religious  Objectors:  R.  Arthur,  I.  S.  Aichen, 
B.  A.  Allerly  (also  Socialist),  A.  J.  Aitken,  J.  A.  Brailsford,  T.  A. 
Bentley,  H.  Blundell  (also  Socialist),  F.  Pallesen,  L.  Robinson,  A. 
Blanchard,  J.  B.  Goulding,  A.  Beaton,  W.  B.  Donovan,  \V.  S.  Badger, 
S.  Woods,  J.  W.  Duke,  Robin  Page,  R.  J.  Halkett,  R.  A.  Stone,  J.  R. 
OUey,  Jasper  O'Brien,  P.  C.  Patton.  A.  Page,  Pettybridge,  S.  A.  Palmer, 
H.  Rankin,  S.  Stronfi,  R.  A.  J.  Palmer.  R.  J.  Irvine,  W.  J.  Younir, 
J.  McCormack,  C.  H.  McCormack,  J.  Rogers,  T.  B.  Struthers,  H.  J. 
Levett,  A.  C.  .Mclntyre,  H.  Wright,  A.  H.  Varnham,  George  E.  Billings, 
J.    S.    Billings,   J.   W.    Clapham.   Ed.    H.    Dowsett,    D.    M.   Banks    (also 

105 


ARMAGEDDON   OR    CALVARY. 

Socialist),  L.  Batten,  H.  G.  Blanchard,  Doherty,  Ferguson,  D.  G.  Fur- 
long, W,  R.  C.  Greenhill,  J.  Gray,  R.  Gray,  T.  H.  Ireton,  J.  G.  Holtham, 
A.  E.  Johns,  McFarlane,  A.  0.  Isaacson,  Percy  Gill.  Irish  Objectors; 
T^  Brosnan,  M.  O'Connor,  J.  O'Brien  (also  Socialist),  D.  Mangan,  W. 
Malley,  G.  H.  Lloyd,  Metcalfe,  G.  T.  Drum,  Daniel  Brosnan,  J.  J.  Lloyd, 
Jordan,  D.  F.  Murphy,  T.  M.  DriscoU  (also  Socialist).  Pacifist  Ob- 
jectors: S.  Fountain,  F.  F.  Fowler,  L.  Foley.  Other  Objectors:  J.  S. 
Morris,  Daglish,  Reed,  Doody,  Hodgkins,  Ash,  Pottinger,  Gunter, 
Murraine,  Hannan,  Christian,  Sheehan,  Schultz,  Appleby,  Cole,  A.  J. 
Morris,  Collins,  Ryan,  Shirer,  Dickson,  Anderson,  Ross,  Conway, 
Higgins,  Hill,  Lynch,  McLean,  Wickes,  Stapleton,  Skinner,  Clark,  Hol- 
royd,  Cunningham,  Cook. 

TWO  SENTENCES  (in  civil  prison).— Donald  Baxter  (Pacifist),  11 
months,  2  years;  K.  H.  Broughton  (Religious),  11  months,  2  years; 
H.  R.  Blade  (Religious),  11  months,  6  months;  J.  H.  Bennett 
(Religious),  11  months,  2  years;  A.  R.  Patten  (Religious), 
11  months,  2  years;  P.  Dodge  (Religious),  11  months,  2  years;  J.  J. 
Hussey  (Socialist),  84  days,  2  years;  Davidson  (Socialist),  11  months, 
2  years;  H.  Adin  (Socialist),  11  months,  2  years;  D.  A.  Jones  (Relig- 
ious), 11  months,  2  years;  H.  King  (Religious),  11  months,  2  years; 
H.  C.  Kelbey  (Religious),  11  months,  2  years;  F.  Money  (Religious), 
11  months,  2  years;  J.  McKenzie  (Socialist),  11  months,  2  years;  R.  A. 
Macrae  (Socialist),  11  months,  2  years;  D.  M.  N.  McCormick  (Relig- 
ious), 11  months,  2  years;  W.  T.  Virtue  (Socialist),  11  months,  2  years; 
S.  C.  Watchorn  (Religious),  11  months,  2  years;  C.  A.  Watson  (Re- 
ligious), 11  months,  2  years;  P.  G.  W^right  (Religious),  11  months, 
2  years;  W.  R.  Robertson  (Socialist),  11  months,  2  years;  C.  W.  Read 
(Religious),  11  months,  2  years;  S.  B.  Read  (Religious),  11  months, 
2  years;  R.  Slockdill  (Religious),  11  months,  2  years;  C.  C.  Steele 
(Religious),  11  months,  2  years;  J.  Pickering  (Religious),  11  months, 
2  years;  Jones  (Socialist),  11  months,  2  years;  R.  H.  Phillips 
(Religious),  11  months,  2  years;  J.  Moye  (Socialist),  11 
months,  2  years;  John  Roberts  (Socialist),  1  year,  6  months; 
A.  K.  Henderson  (Pacifist),  9  months,  2  years;  Tom  Kelly 
(Irish  and  Socialist),  4  months,  2  years;  L.  (I'ody  (Irish),  11  months, 
2  years. 

THREE  SE.XTENCES  (in  civil  prison).— D.  Williams  (Irish  and 
Socialist),  84  days,  11  months,  2  years;  J.  Cody  (Irish),  84  days,  11 
months,  2  years;  Rhys  Morrish  (Religious  Objector),  84  days,  11 
months,  2  years. 

OTHERS  (sentences  not  ascertained). — Armstrong,  J.  Brindle. 
Church,  (h-a\g,  Gear,  F.  T.  Johnstone,  Scott,  Morris,  Selby,  Newman, 
Mills,  Spaiildin,?,  Bowline,  Blackburn,  H.  Goldsbury,  Holtham,  Hasse, 
Hawker,  McManus,  McKee,  Hedloy,  H.  Ellman,  Drummond,  Deane, 
GranL'f  r,  Brady,  Bolton,  Joyce,  Jessop,  Kells,  Kelly,  Marshall,  Pearson. 
Plewf  s,  Gankhurst,  Thackeray,  Vallance. 

106 


XIX.— DIFFERENTIATP]!)    SENTENCES. 

The  contrast  in  the  sentences  awarded  the  Conscientious  Objec- 
tors is  most  marked.  For  practically  the  same  "offence"  men  received 
sentences  which  ranged  from  seven  days'  detention  in  the  barracks 
to  two  years'  hard  labour  in  the  common  jail. 

This  differentiation  is  conspicuous  even  in  the  cases  of  members 
of  the  same  family.  The  sentences  inflicted  on  the  Baxter  brothers 
furnish  an  illustration.  The  weight  of  the  military  law  fell  on  this 
family  with  unabated  relentlessness.  There  were  seven  sons  in  the 
family,  one  of  whom  is  married  and  has  four  children,  and,  therefore, 
did  not  come  within  the  scope  of  the  Military  Service  Act  during  the 
war  period.  The  six  other  sons,  who  are  Passive  Objectors,  were  all 
seized  by  the  military  authorities.  Three  of  them  were  three  times 
sentenced  in  New  Zealand  (28  days'  detention,  84  days'  civil 
prison,  28  days'  detention)  and  then  deported;  the  other 
three  were  jailed.  The  brothers  were  practical  farmers,  but 
the  military  left  the  aged  parents  without  a  son  to  work  the  little 
farm.  The  father  is  an  old  man,  crippled  with  rheumatism;  the 
mother  is  nearly  seventy  years  of  age.  After  the  first  three  had  beea 
forcibly  transported,  two  of  the  remaining  three  (Donald  and  Hugh) 
were  called  in  the  same  ballot,  arrested  on  the  same  day,  tried  by 
courtmartial  on  the  same  charge,  and  sentenced  on  the  same  day 
each  to  11  months'  hard  labour.  Hugh  was  sent  to  Waimarino,  Donald 
to  Templeton  Prison.  When  Hugh  had  served  his  11  months  he  wa:5 
releasea  and  returned  to  his  home,  but  Donald  was  ordered  into  camp, 
and,  on  again  refusing,  was  sentenced  to  two  years'  hard  labour. 
Another  brother,  William,  was  arrested  a  few  months  later,  was  sen- 
tenced to  11  months'  hard  labour,  which  sentence  he  served,  and  was 
then  released.  So  that  Donald  was  penalised  to  the  extent  of  nearly 
three  years'  imprisonment  with  hard  labour,  whilst  hi.'^  two  hi-others, 
for  the  same  offence,  wei-e  only  required  to  serve  11  months.  Hugh, 
after  his  release,  died  of  influen/.a.  Through  someone's  carelessness, 
the  military  law  pursued  him  past  the  grave;  and  in  due  time  his 
name  appeared  in  the  "Gazette"  as  a  defaulter  who  was  to  he  de- 
prived of  all  civil  riuhts  for  ten  years.  Donald  is  still  in  prison,  but 
William   is  free. 

The  Codys  arc  another  family  doomed  to  be  broken  up  and  threat- 
ened with  ruin  l)y  the  .Military  Service  Act.  They  are  also  a  family 
of  farmers,  and  are  Irish  Objectors.  There  are  tive  sons,  all  of 
whom  were  called  up  under  Section  3.5  of  the  Act,  with  the  result 
that  three  were  ordered  into  camp.  They  refused  to  obey  the  order, 
and  the  two  other  brothers  were  thereupon  seized  by  the  military  and 
sent  to  prison  upon  refusing  to  undertake  military  service.  The 
aged  father  was  left  to  work  a  large  and  heaviiy-mortgaged  holdin.g 
without  the  assistance  of  any  of  his  sons.      P.  Cody  served  a  sentence 

li'T 


ARMAGEDDON   OR    CALVARY. 

of  11  months,  and  has  not  since  been  re-sentenced.  Jack  Cody,  who 
was  first  arrested  in  July  of  1917,  is  at  present  serving  his  fourth 
sentence  (including  that  in  the  detention  barracks).  Lawrence  Cody 
served  a  sentence  of  11  months,  and  was  then  given  an  additional  two 
years'  hard  labour,  which  he  is  now  serving.  Michael  Cody  was 
arrested  on  August  3,  1918;  served  a  sentence  of  three  months  at 
Mount  Cook;  was  held  56  days  awaiting  courtmartial;  and  is  now 
serving  two  years'  hard  labour,  which  sentence  will  not  be  completed 
until  the  end  of  July,  1920. 

Another  case  in  point  is  that  of  the  three  Wright  brothers  (Relig- 
ious Objectors),  of  Auckland.  .  One  served  11  months,  and  was  re- 
leased; another  served  11  months,  and  was  then  sentenced  to  two 
years'  hard  labour.  The  third,  a  Second  Division  man,  was  ordered 
into  camp,  but  peace  being  proclaimed,  he  was  not  required,  and  so 
escaped  either  military  service  or  prison. 

David  Williams  (Irish  Objector)  served  84  days  in  the  civil  prison, 
was  then  ordered  into  camp,  and  on  again  refusing  service,  was  sen- 
tenced to  11  months.  On  the  completion  of  this  sentence  he  was 
again  ordered  to  take  the  uniform,  and  on  refusing  the  third  time  was 
sentenced  to  two  years.      He  is  still  in  prison. 

Rhys  Morrish  (Unitarian)  served  84  days,  after  which  he  was  sen- 
tenced to  11  months,  and  was  then  given  a  third  sentence  of  two 
years'  hard  labour,  which  he  is  still  serving. 

C.  A.  Watson,  teacher,  was  sentenced  to  11  months'  imprisonment 
without  hard  labour,  on  actount  of  being  classed  CI  and  considered 
unfit;  and,  after  serving  this  sentence,  was  re-sentenced  to  two  years 
— with  hard  labour. 

Kenneway  Henderson,  artist,  Tolstoyan,  and  anti-militarist  for 
more  than  14  years,  was  "reluctantly"  sentenced  by  courtmartial  lO 
nine  months'  hard  labour.  When  this  sentence  was  completed,  he  was 
allowed  to  go  free  for  six  weeks  while  peace  negotiations  were  pro- 
ceeding; and  was  then  re-arrested  and  sentenced  to  two  years'  hard 
labour. 

A  letter  from  a  CO.  in  Waikeria  (1/12/18)  says:  "Our  sentences 
have  been  varied.  There  are  some  C.O.'s  doing  their  third  term,  an3 
some  their  first.  Some  are  doing  two  years,  others  11  months.  Two 
of  the  11  months'  men  go  out  the  second  week  in  January  next,  and 
others  who  came  here  about  the  same  time  don't  go  out  until  January, 
1920 — and  all  are  in  for  the  same  offence." 

Yet  another  anomaly  arises  out  of  the  ending  of  the  war.  Those 
Conscientious  Objectors  whose  sentences  expired  after  the  Armistice 
was  signed  were  not  re-arrested,  while  others  *whose  sentences  ex- 
pired just  a  short  time  before  that  date  were  re-sentenced — generally 
to  two  years'  hard  labour.  In  this  connection,  it  has  previously  been 
pointeri  out  that  "the  matter  of  time  (which  is  out  of  every  man's  con- 
trol) and  not  the  nature  of  the  offence  became  the  deciding  factor  as 
to  whether  a  man  was  to  enjoy  freedom  or  be  locked  in  prison  walls." 

108 


XX.— p.   C.   WEBB.   iM.P. 

Mr.  P.  C.  Webb,  M.P.  for  Grey,  took  a  most  prominent  part  in  fiKht- 
ing  Conscription  both  on  the  public  platform  and  during  the  passage  of 
the  Bill  through  Parliament.  Along  with  other  members  of  the  Labour 
Party  and  some  non-Labour  members,  he  was  responsible  for  beat- 
ing the  proposal,  backed  strongly  by  Sir  Joseph  Ward,  that  the 
soldiers'  pay  should  be  restricted  to  25/-  a  week,  with  sixpence  per 
day  allowance  for  each  child.  The  Labour  members  and  those  who 
thought  with  them  were  able  to  add  10/-  per  week  to  the  soldiers' 
wage,  and  1/-  per  day  to  the  child's  allowance.  When  he  was  drawn 
in  the  ballot,  Mr.  Webb  made  it  clear  that  he  would  not  go  into  camp 
unless  his  constituents  desired  him  to  do  so.  His  letter  to  Sir  James 
Allen,  printed  below,  fully  explains  the  position  he  took  up.  During 
February  of  1918,  he  was  engaged  in  vigorously  supporting  my  can- 
didature for  Wellington  North,  and  took  part  in  the  great  public 
meeting  held  immediately  after  the  contest.  After  being  drawn  hi 
the  ballot  he  tendered  his  resignation  as  M.P.  for  Grey  to  give  the 
Government  an  opportunity  to  test  the  will  of  the  electorate;  but  the 
Government  was  so  well  satisfied  that  the  constituency  was  against  Its 
member  being  conscripted  that  it  made  discretion  the  better  part  of 
valour  and  refused  to  accept  the  challenge.  Mr.  Webb  was  returned 
unopposed.  His  appeal  was  duly  dismissed  by  the  Military  Board, 
and  representations  made  to  the  Minister  of  Defence  by  Mr.  P.  J. 
O'Regan,  counsel  for  the  Miners'  Federation  and  the  Grey  political 
Labour  bodies,  produced  negative  results. 

Under  date  March  7,  1918,  the  following  letter  was  addressed  to 
Sir  James  Allen  by  Mr.  Webb:  — 

Sir, — In  view  of  the  replies  sent  to  Mr.  O'Regan  in  answer  to  that 
gentleman's  representations  in  my  behalf  under  instructions  from  the 
New  Zealand  Coalminers'  Federation  and  the  Grey  District  Labour 
Council,  I  feel  it  incumbent  upon  me  to  address  this  letter  to  you. 

First,  I  would  remind  you  that  a  General  Election  took  place  in 
1914,  notwithstanding  the  fact  that  the  war  was  then  raging  and  that 
the  enemy  was  threatening  Paris.  On  that  occasion  the  Grey  electors 
returned  me  with  an  increased  majority.  From  the  soldiers  entitled 
to  vote  in  the  electorate,  I  received  almost  unanimous  support,  and 
they  in  particular  requested  me  to  look  after  their  interests  and  the 
interests  of  their  dependants,  and  solicited  my  assistance  in  protest- 
ing against  the  shameful  manner  in  which  their  dependants  were 
being  exploited  by  means  of  unnecessarily  excessive  prices.  I  have 
done  my  best  to  conform  to  their  wishes,  but  being  in  a  minority  in 
Parliament,  have  been  powerless  to  do  more  than  protest.  Further, 
my  soldier-constituents  expressed  the  wish  that,  in  the  event  of  their 

109 


ARMAGEDDON    OR   CALVARY. 

returning  to  New  Zealand  incapacitated,  suitable  employment  should 
be  found  for  them,  together  with  reasonable  recompense  for  their 
injuries.  Again,  I  have  complied  with  their  wishes  in  that  connec- 
tion, and  have  protested  emphatically  against  the  way  in  which  many 
disabled  men  are  being  turned  adrift  unable  to  follow  their  ordinary 
occupations,  and  yet  deprived  of  pensions.  That  the  Government  has 
failed  lamentably  to  cope  with  the  problem  of  excessive  prices,  and 
that  men  who  have  returned  disabled  are  not  being  properly  provided 
for  is  due  to  no  fault  of  mine,  inasmuch  as  I  have  repeatedly  drawn 
attention  to  these  grievances. 

After  my  election  in  1914,  I  stated  publicly  that  if  the  Grey  elec- 
tor? considered  my  services  more  essential  at  the  front  than  in  Par- 
liament, on  receipt  of  a  requisition,  signed  by  1000  electors,  I  would 
resign  my  seat  and  abide  by  the  will  of  the  majority  of  the  consti- 
tuency. No  requisition  was  ever  presented,  and  on  my  being  balloted 
for  military  service,  numerously-signed  petitions  were  presented 
from  my  electorate  and  from  the  West  Coast  generally,  asking  for  my 
exemption,  and  I  may  say  that  the  signatories  to  these  petitions  in- 
cluded a  large  number  of  parents  who  had  sons  at  the  front  as  well 
as  a  considerable  number  of  returned  soldiers  and  men  in  camp. 
Moreover,  these  requisitions  were  supported  by  the  whole  of  the 
miners'  organisations  of  this  country.  The  Military  Service  Board, 
however,  saw  fit  to  ignore  these  representations,  and  dismissed  the 
appeal,  although  the  said  Board  has  repeatedly  granted  exemption 
in  other  cases  on  much  more  slender  grounds.  I  then  resigned  my 
seat  and  placed  myself  unreservedly  in  the  hands  of  my  constituents, 
who  re-elected  me  without  opposition.  My  constituents  then  asked 
for  a  re-hearing  of  my  appeal,  but  this  was  refused  without  anyone 
being  heard  in  support.  Now  that  my  constituents  are  to  be  denied 
the  right  of  representation,  in  that  I  am  not  to  be  allowed  to  prepare 
for  and  attend  regularly  in  my  place  in  Parliament  during  the  coming 
session,  I  feel  that  but  one  honourable  course  is  open  to  me.  I  have 
either  to  remain  true  to  my  constituents  or  obey  the  command  of  a 
Board  which,  they  believe,  has  not  treated  my  case  judicially,  and 
which  I  believe  to  have  been  influenced  by  a  strong  spirit  of  political 
prejudice  against  me.  In  other  words,  I  ha^e  resolved  to  disobey  the 
Board  and  to  take  the  consequences.  Incidentally,  I  intend  my  action 
as  a  protest  against  the  utter  failure  of  your  Government  to  deal 
fairly  with  the  disabled  soldiers  and  their  dependants  or  indeed  with 
the  masses  of  the  people  of  this  country.  That  your  Government  has 
failed  lamentably  in  its  duty  by  the  returned  soldiers  and  their  de- 
pendants and  by  the  masses  of  the  people  of  this  country  is  fully 
evidenced  by  the  fact  that  it  has  won  the  support  of  every  person  who 
profits  by  the  sufferings  of  the  masses  of  his  fellow-citizens.  Perhaps 
under  the  circumstances  it  is  only  common  gratitude  on  the  part  of 
such  people  that  they  should  have  sent  their  motor-cars  to  assist  in 
defeating  the  representative  of  Labour   in  the  recent  by-election.     I 

110 


p.  C.  WEBB,  M.P. 

would  add  that  it  is  not  surprising  that  a  Government  with  such  a 
record  as  yours  should  have  postponed  a  General  Election. 

In  conclusion,  I  may  state  that  my  address  is  Post  Office  Box  1500, 
Wellington. 

I  have  the  honour  to  remam,  Sir,  yours  truly, 

P.  C.  WEBB. 

On  March  11,  at  Wellington,  Mr.  Webb  was  entertained  at  luncheon 
by  representatives  of  the  industrial  and  political  Labour  movement; 
and  at  2.30  on  the  same  day  he  was  arrested  and  conveyed  to  Tren- 
tham  by  the  military.  On  March  22  he  was  courtmartialled  at  Tren- 
tham,  when  he  pleaded  guilty  to  the  charge  of  disobeying  an  order. 
He,  however,  desired  to  state  his  position.  During  the  course  of  his 
address  he  was  repeatedly  interrupted  by  the  Court.  When  he  made 
the  charge  that  discrimination  had  been  employed  by  the  Boards,  he 
was  ruled  out.  He  was  also  prevented  from  referring  to  the  Laidlaw 
case  to  illustrate  his  argument.  When  he  showed  how  the  police  had 
been  specially  exempted,  and  contended  that  a  member  of  Parliament 
was  just  as  essential  as  a  policeman,  he  was  told:  "The  Board  does 
not  think  that  Parliament  can  be  regarded  as  essential.  It  thinks 
that  the  men  at  the  head  of  affairs  are  capable  of  governing  the 
country."  (To  many  in  the  Labour  movement  this  remark  read  like 
a  clear  indication  of  the  extent  to  which  the  military  mind  is  capable 
of  travelling  in  the  direction  of  oligarchic  rule.)  Mr.  Webb  remarked 
that  this  resembled  the  autocracy  the  war  was  ostensibly  being  fought 
to  crush,  and  the  President  ruled  out  all  reference  to  autocracy. 
Shortly  after  this  the  President  informed  Mr.  Webb  that  the  people 
of  New  Zealand,  through  the  Government,  had  told  him  to  go  to  the 
front.  Mr.  Webb  retorted  that  he  was  elected  to  oppose  the  Govern- 
ment, and  that  his  constituents  were  entitled  to  consideration  anyhow. 
The  President  then  lectured  Mr.  Webb  on  the  text  that  the  New 
Zealand  Government  was  much  more  clear-sighted  than  some  other 
governments.  Mr.  Webb  thought  this  was  a  matter  the  people 
might  be  left  to  decide,  and  when  the  President  remarked  that  the 
people  had  elected  the  Government,  Mr.  Webb  reminded  him  that  the 
issue  then  was  not  Conscription.  Mr.  Webb,  continuing,  pointed  out 
the  implications  of  Conscription  In  that  under  the  prevalent  secret 
diplomacy  men  could  be  conipelled  to  fight  for  principles  thf^r  own 
governments  had  denounced.  He  said  it  was,  therefore,  autocracy  and 
despotism.  The  President  said  the  Court  was  in  possession  of  enough 
information  to  judge  the  "■accused's"  attitude,  and  thought  he  ought 
to  sit  down.  He  also  drew  attcMiiion  to  the  capacity  of  the  Court  to 
understand  the  Labour  problem.  All  its  members  had  been  two  ycaa's 
at  the  front,  and  knew  tlie  f(>eUngs  of  the  soldiers.  Later  on  he  de- 
livered a  homily  on  the  virtues  of  supporting  the  Government,  else  the 
victory  of  Germany  would  destroy  the  freedom  of  I-iibour  members  of 
Parliament    and    everybody   else.        He    said    that    "if    'Private"    Webb 

111 


ARMAGEDDON   OR   CALVARY. 

believed  that  the  Government  he  had  been  maligning  did  not  contain 
any  man  capable  of  looking  after  the  interests  of  his  constituents  he 
was  justified  in  his  attitude."  Mr.  Webb  was  just  about  to  interject 
upon  the  President's  verbosity  that  he  had  "good  justification  in  that 
case  because  my  constituents  would  certainly  not  allow  themselves  to 
be  represented  by  any  member  of  the  Government,"  when  Colonel  Mac- 
Donald  saw  fit  to  check  the  President  by  remarking  "that  the  'accused' 
should  be  allowed  to  make  his  statements  and  only  interrupted  when 
he  has  to  be  stopped."  At  this  the  President  subsided  into  a  silence 
long  enough  for  Mr.  Webb  to  finish  his  speech  without  further  Inter- 
ruption. Concluding,  Mr.  Webb  said  that  it  was  evident  that  had  he 
the  eloquence  of  a  Gladstone  or  an  O'Connell  he  would  not  be  able  to 
secure  a  mitigation  of  his  sentence.  He  had  no  regret  for  the  stand 
he  was  taking.  He  asked  for  no  clemency.  He  was  proud  to  be 
able  to  carry  his  principles  to  the  prison  gates.  If  his  principles 
were  not  worth  suffering  for  they  were  not  worth  having.  He  was 
sure  the  day  would  come  when  the  Government  would  pay  the  penalty 
for  its  outrage  against  his  constituency  and  for  the  policy  of  oppression 
and  exploitation  it  had  pursued  ever  since  the  war  began. 

When  the  sentence  of  the  Court  was  promulgated,  it  proved  to  be 
the  usual  two  years'  hard  labour;  and  Mr.  Webb  was  taken  to  the 
prison  camp  on  the  Kaingaroa  Plateau,  near  Rotorua,  to  serve  his 
term,  which  will  have  expired  ere  this  book  is  in  the  readers'  hands. 

On  April  6  a  public  demonstration  of  protest  was  held  at  Grey- 
mouth,  the  citizens  of  the  Grey  Valley  generally  and  the  Labour  or- 
ganisations in  particular,  participating.  The  following  resolution  was 
carried  unanimously:  — 

"That  this  large  gathering  of  electors  of  Grey  views  with  indigna- 
tion the  action  of  the  military  authorities  in  seizing  and  imprisoning 
Mr.  P.  C.  Webb,  M.P.,  and  calls  upon  the  Government  to  secure  and 
preserve  the  rights  of  a  member  of  Parliament  to  attend  to  his  Par- 
liamentary duties  and  to  provide  him  with  the  means  of  attending  to 
the  business  of  his  constituency.  We  beg  to  remind  the  Government 
that,  according  to  the  decision  of  the  Crown  Law  Officers,  Mr.  Webb 
has  committed  no  crime  within  the  meaning  of  the  Legislature  Act; 
and  we  protest  strongly  against  military  authority  denying  political 
expression  to  an  electorate  of  8000  electors,  backed  up  by  the  deter- 
mined effort  of  20,000  industrialists,  of  whom  Mr.  Webb  is  the  only 
direct  and  practical  representative  and  expression.  We  place  before 
the  authorities  the  case  of  Mr.  Laidlaw,  of  the  firm  of  Laidlaw  Leeds, 
of  Auckland,  who  was  exempted  by  an  Appeal  Board  to  serve  the 
economic  interests  of  his  firm,  and  urge  that  Mr.  Webb's  presence  in 
the  House  and  attending  to  the  business  of  his  constituency  is  an 
absolute  and  urgent  necessity.  We  hold  that  it  is  an  absolute  and 
inalienable  right  of  an  electorate  to  choose  its  own  member  of  Par- 
liament, and  we  trust  for  the  sake  of  political  liberty  in  New  Zealand 

112 


p.  C.  WEBB,  M.P. 

that  the  Government  will  ponder  long  and  carefully  before  it  denies 
this  right  to  the  electors  of  Grey  and  to  the  industrial  unions  of  New 
Zealand,  of  which  Mr.  Webb  is  the  only  practical  exponent  in  the 
House  of  Representatives." 

On  April  12  a  Labour  deputation  waited  upon  the  Prime  Minister, 
Sir  Joseph  Ward,  Sir  James  Allen,  and  Mr.  Wilford  to  urf?e  the  un- 
conditional release  of  Mr.  Webb.  This  deputation  included  repre- 
sentatives of  the  Grey  Labour  Representation  Committee,  Miners' 
Federation,  United  Federation  of  Labour,  New  Zealand  Labour  Party, 
Drivers'  Federation,  Seamen's  Federation,  Tramway  Federation,  Wel- 
lington Trades  and  Labour  Council,  Auckland  L.R.C.,  Wellington 
S.D.P.,  A.P.U.,  Waterside  Workers'  Federation,  Enginedrivers'  F'edera- 
tion,  Wellington  L.R.C.,  Otago  Trades  and  Labour  Council,  House- 
wives' Union,  Women's  International  League,  and  others.  Mr.  James 
O'Brien,  representing  Mr.  Webb's  constituents,  presented  the  resolu- 
tion already  quoted,  and  a  strong  point  made  by  the  deputation  was 
that  the  Imperial  Government  had  not  forced  any  member  of  the  House 
of  Commons  from  his  constituency  to  the  battlefield.  The  Government, 
however,  refused  to  accede  to  the  deputation's  request,  and  maintained 
its  attitude  notwithstanding  that  from  every  part  of  New  Zealand  pro- 
tests came  from  the  Labour  movement  against  the  conscription  of  the 
Labour  M.P. 

In  April  a  lightning  session  of  Parliament  was  held;  and,  during 
this  session,  a  motion  to  grant  the  Member  for  Grey  leave  of  absence 
was  defeated.  This  meant  that,  although  Mr.  Webb  was  held  not  to  be 
disqualified  by  the  terms  of  his  sentence  from  remaining  a  member 
of  the  House,  his  seat  became  vacant  by  reason  of  his  absence  from  the 
House  for  one  whole  session  without  leave.  A  fresh  election  was 
accordingly  called.  The  industrial  and  political  organisations  of 
Labour  in  the  electorate  honoured  me  with  an  unopposed  selection,  and 
a  main  feature  of  the  contest  was  made  the  Government's  Conscrip- 
tion policy  and  its  jailing  of  Mr.  Webb.  The  Tory  and  Liberal  sup- 
porters of  the  Government  consolidated  their  forces  behind  the  most 
popular  local  man  who  could  be  induced  to  stand.  With  a  lively  ap- 
preciation of  the  Government's  unpopularity,  they  .sought  to  camou- 
flage their  campaign  with  "Independent"  colourings.  The  result  of  the 
contest  was  a  decisive  defeat  for  the  Government,  and  a  triumphant 
vindication  of  Mr.  W'ebb's  attitude. 

The  imprisonment  of  .Mr.  Webb  was  deeply  resented  by  the  re- 
turned soldiers  in  the  constituency,  as  was  evidenced  by  the  large 
deputation  of  returned  men,  which,  introduced  by  myself,  waited  upon 
the  Hon.  Mr.  Wilford  at  Greymouth  in  the  early  part  of  this  year  to 
demand  the  release  of  their  late  member.  It  is,  perhaps,  significant 
that,  with  the  exception  of  two  local  daiJics,  no  newspaper  in  New 
Zealand  was  prepared  to  print  a  comprehensive  report  of  this  re- 
markable deputation. 

113 


XXI.— IN  PRISON  AND  DETENTION. 

Mr.  P.  C.  Webb  corresponded  with  me  with  unbroken  regularity 
from  the  date  of  his  incarceration;  and  I  almost  invariably  put'  his 
letters  into  print.  He  wrote  unselfish  letters  of  encouragement  and 
strength  during  the  Grey  campaign;  letters  of  happy  congratulation 
when  our  victory  was  recorded;  letters  full  of  cheery  optimism 
when  the  petition  failed,  and  we  swept  onward  to  the  great  victories 
of  Wellington  Central  and  Wellington  South.  Then  the  iron  heel  of 
repression  left  its  mark.  On  February  2,  1919,  Mr.  Webb  wrote  to  me: 
"Since  writing  to  you  last  I  guess  the  Prisons  Department  has  issued 
new  Regulations,  which  prevent  me  wiiting  anything  about  Socialism, 
Industrial  Unionism,  the  causes  of  and  responsibility  for  many  of  the 
imported  and  locally-produced  epidemics.  I  am  not  permitted  to  write 
anything  that  reflects  on  the  Government,  and  must  refrain  from 
making  any  reference  to  the  class  war — even  the  need  for  its  ending. 
Under  no  circumstances  will  I  be  allowed  to  express  my  views  on  the 
war  or  things  arising  therefrom.  Anti-Conscription  views  must  re- 
main in  abeyance  until  I  regain  my  liberty.  All  political  questions  are 
placed  in  the  same  category."  All  that  he  could  now  write  about  would 
be  the  weather,  his  own  health,  and  the  health  of  his  friends  and 
kindred  subjects.  In  a  subsequent  letter,  Mr.  Webb  signed  himself 
"Yours  for  Socialism."  The  word  "Socialism"  was  erased  by  the  prison 
censor,  but  not  sufficiently  to  make  it  unreadable — a  ridiculous  and 
childlike  censorship,  in  any  case. 

About  this  time  "Stead's  Review" — the  one  publication  that  pre- 
sented a  concise  and  truthful  summary  of  the  war  situation — was 
denied  admission  to  the  prisons.  "Stead's"  had  up  to  this  time  been 
sent  to  most  of  the  C.O.'s.  The  Minister  of  Justice,  in  endeavoring  to 
explain  his  action  in  this  respect,  put  forward  the  excuse  that 
"Stead's"  had  a  depressing  effect  on  the  prisoners! 

An  Irish  Objector — Mr.  Denis  Mangan — wrote  from  Waikeria  Pri- 
son to  a  friend  outside.  His  letter  is  heavily  censored,  the  matter  ob- 
jected to  being  covered  with  blue  pencilling  in  the  first  place  and  then 
daubed  over  with  black.  He  is  telling  his  friend  that  his^  time  will 
be  up  on  a  certain  date  in  May,  and  that  he  and  another  C.O.  will  be 
free  in  so  many  weeks  from  the  date  of  his  letter.  The  figures  are 
blotted  out,  but  the  word  "May"  is  left  in.  The  letter  concludes:  "So 
good-bye  for  eight  weeks" — words  which  the  Censor  apparently  ovc- 
lookcd,  and  the  overlooking  of  which  made  his  other  censorship  so 
much  wasted   effort. 

In  the  first  half  of  1919  a  hunger  strike  was  entered  upon  at  Wai- 
keria. Seven  men  began  to  fast  as  a  protest  against  the  whole  prison 
system.  P'ive  were  Religious  Objectors,  one  Socialist,  and  one  Irish. 
One  man,  suffering  with  cramps,  took  food  on  the  eleventh  day.     The 

114 


IN  PRISON  AND  DETP:NTI0N. 

others  went  to  the  twelfth  day,  when  it  is  alleged  ihe  strike  was 
called  off  as  the  result  of  a  visit  to  the  prison  of  the  mother  of  one 
of  them. 

At  Papanui  (Templeton)  a  strike  occurred,  when  a  West  Coaster 
refused  to  do  "Are  drill."  He  told  the  prison  authorities  that  he  had 
been  jailed  for  his  principles  and  deprived  of  his  franchise,  and  they 
need  not  wonder  if  he  didn't  care  if  their  old  jail  did  get  burnt  down. 
He  was  "dummied,"  and  a  number  of  the  other  Objectors  went  on  a 
sympathy  strike,  and  were  "locked  up."  In  due  time  a  magistrate 
came,  and  they  were  tried  and  deprived  of  their  "privileges"  for  one 
month. 

In  Kaingaroa,  where  in  the  intensely  cold  weather  the  Objectors 
were  in  the  habit  of  taking  down  their  blankets  to  keep  themselves 
warm  on  the  wet  days  when  they  did  not  go  out  to  work,  an  order  that 
the  blankets  must  not  be  taken  was  disregarded  by  Mr.  P.  C.  Webb  and 
others,  and  the  outcome  was  a  magisterial  inquiry,  the  result  of 
which  is  not  available  at  the  time  of  writing. 

Mr.  Robert  Gould,  a  Wellington  waterside  worker  imprisoned  at 
Waikeria,  whose  wife  was  ill,  asked  to  be  transferred  to  Wellington  to 
be  near  her.  When  his  request  was  refused,  he  struck  work  and  food, 
and  was  "locked  up."  Mr.  John  Brailsford,  B.A.,  then  struck  work 
and  food  as  a  protest  against  Gould's  treatment.  Both  Gould  and 
Brailsford  were  removed  to  Mt.  Eden.  Mr.  Gould's  hunger  strike  lasted 
seven  days.     He  was  eventually  transferred  to  Wellington. 

Mr.  Harry  Urquhart,  after  his  release,  wrote  me  that  when  one 
man  fell  ill  at  Waikeria,  no  change  of  underclothing  was  given  him 
for  over  a  fortnight,  and  no  provision  was  made  for  a  bath  or  sponge- 
down  of  any  sort.  The  food  supplied  to  him  was  greasy  and  unpalat- 
able until  complaint  was  made.  Only  once,  when  be  was  very  ill, 
it  was  alleged,  was  an  attempt  made  to  take  this  man's  temperature, 
and  then  the  thermometer  was  accidentally  broken.  The  patient  was 
locked  up  in  his  solitary  cell  during  the  night  hours;  and  if  he  used 
the  night  utensils  they  could  not  be  emptied  until  morning.  The  other 
C.O.'s  deputed  Mr.  Urquhart  to  interview  the  Jailer  a])0Ut  the  case, 
but  the  only  satisfaction  he  got  was  permission  to  see  the  doctor  re 
the  matter.  The  doctor,  however,  peremptorily  ordered  .Mr.  Urquhart 
out  of  the  office,  and  told  him  that  it  would  be  time  enough  for  him 
to  complain  when  he  himself  was  in  the  hospital  and  dissatisfied  with 
his  own  treatment.  He  was  further  told  that  the  man  himself  had 
not  complained — which,  he  says,  was  probably  true,  since  his  parti- 
cular religion  would  prevent  him  from   doing  so. 

One  of  the  Objectors,  William  White,  died  at  Mt.  Eden  in  January 
last.  According  to  the  statements  of  men  who  were  his  fellow-prison- 
ers. White  was  brought  from  Waimarino  Camp -to  Mt.  Eden  on  January 
18.  He  was  transferred  for  medical  treatment,  being  sick  and  unable 
to  work.  It  is  alleged  that  he  did  not  receive  medical  attention  until 
January    24 — six    days    after   his    arrival,    and    that    he    was    given   no 

115 


ARMAGEDDON   OR   CALVARY. 

special  consideration  in  the  matter  of  diet.  Mr.  Brailsford  explains 
that  Mt.  Eden  diet  was  at  this  time  dry  bread  and  porridge  and  tea 
without  milk  morning  and  evening,  and  at  midday  very  coarse  beef, 
potatoes,  and  sometimes  a  tiny  portion  of  carrot  or  other  vegetable, 
with  fish  on  Fridays.  The  menu  did  not  include  either  milk,  butter, 
or  treacle.  On  the  Saturday  before  his  death  (it  is  asserted)  White 
was  deprived  of  his  tobacco  allowance  for  doing  insufficient  work. 
His  work,  it  may  be  explained,  was  "napping"  road  metal.  The  night 
before  his  death  he  was  heard  knocking  to  attract  att-ention,  and  some 
of  the  prisoners  make  the  charge  that  no  attention  was  paid  to  him. 
In  the  morning,  at  6.45,  his  breakfast  was  pushed  in.  When  the 
warder  came  back  to  lock  him  in  at  7.45,  White  pleaded  that  the  door 
might  be  left  open,  saying  that  he  "hadn't  a  friend  in  the  world  and 
was  feeling  very  bad."  The  door  was  not  left  open.  When  the  other 
prisoners  returned  from  physical  drill,  White  was  rolling  about  and 
sweating  in  agony  in  his  hammock,  and  there  was  vomit  on  the  floor 
of  his  cell.  It  is  alleged  that  a  little  later  White  was  told  by  an  offi- 
cial that  if  he  got  out  into  the  fresh  air  and  did  some  light  work  he 
would  feel  better.  Not  long  after  this  the  doctor  came,  and  at  once 
ordered  the  man  into  the  prison  hospital,  where  he  died  almost  imme- 
diately. His  fellow-prisoners  complain  that  when  the  inquest  was 
held  a  number  of  them  who  could  have  given  important  evidence 
were  not  called.  The  verdict  was  that  death  was  due  to  heart  trouble. 
On  the  public  platform  I  have  repeatedly  made  the  demand  that  this 
case  should  be  investigated,  but  my  demand  has  so  far  been  without 
effect. 

A  young  school-teacher,  writing  to  his  mother,  says:  "The  jail 
is  full  of  nothing  but  Objectors.  The  doctor  asks  the  prisoners  what 
they  are  in  for.  If  they  are  Objectors,  God  pity  them  if  they  are  ill." 
He  adds  that  a  soldier  was  "brought  here  and  made  to  do  salute  drill 
for  two  hours  on  end,  until  he  was  exhausted,  because  he  failed  to 
salute  an  officer  down  the  street." 

Another  letter  from  one  of  the  prisoners  contains  the  news  that 
"the  Israelite  has  been  16  days  hunger-striking,  and  is  still  going 
strong.  He  takes  nothing  but  water."  This  refers  to  an  Objector 
who  belongs  to  the  Christian  Israelites. 

In  a  letter  from  an  imprisoned  Objector  to  a  friend,  by  whom  it 
was  sent  on  to  me,  the  writer,  who  is  a  well-known  watersider,  says: 
"I  was  dragged  out  of  bed  to-night  ai  9  o'clock  for  asking  for  more 
and  better  food,  and  making  a  complaint  about  the  food  supplied  being 
unwholesome.  Treated  like  a  dog."  This  note  was  scribbled  with  a 
pencil  (in  the  "express  for  Auckland")  on  a  leaf  torn  from  a  note- 
book. 

A  CO.  wrote  to  his  wife  from  one  of  the  "clinks":  "I  am  well  and 
.spiritually  happy.  But,  oh,  the  hardships  I  have  seen  other  men 
endure.  I  have  had  to  cry — I  couldn't  help  it."  The  same  letter 
mentions    that    "one    imprisoned     returned    soldier   got   word   that   his 

116 


IN  PRISON'  AND  DKTKXTION. 

mother  was  dying.  They  would  not  let  him  go  to  see  her.  Then  a 
wire  came  to  say  she  was  dead.  Even  then  he  did  not  get  away." 
"And,"  the  writer  added,  "he  was  only  in  prison  for  hitting  a  red- 
cap." 

A  degrading  and  revolting  practice  in  the  prisons  is  what  is  known 
as  "searching."  Prisoners  are  searched  at  intervals  for  contraband. 
The  prisoner  is  required  to  strip  himself  naked,  and  his  clothes  and 
person  are  then  scrutinised  by  the  warders.  While  I  was  in  the  Terrace 
Jail  at  Wellington  the  system  was  described  to  me  by  prisoners  who 
had  often  undergone  the  process.  Some  of  them  told  me  of  disgusting 
and  humiliating  methods  employed  by  the  worst  of  the  officials.  Of 
course,  the  better  class  of  official  hates  the  work  as  much  as  the 
prisoner  hates  the  experience.  It  has  been  reported  to  me  that  Mr. 
Donald  Baxter,  for  refusing  to  submit  to  this  degradation,  was  deprived 
of  his  "privileges"  for  a  given  time.  In  other  words,  if  my  informa- 
tion is  correct,  and  I  have  no  reason  to  doubt  its  authenticity,  Mr. 
Baxter  was  prevented  from  writing  to  his  mother,  from  receiving 
either  letters  or  visitors,  and  from  enjoying  other  smaller  privileges 
because  he  would  not  debase  himself  to  the  extent  required  by  the 
prison  regulations.  It  is  needless  to  say  that  a  vile  custom  of  this 
nature  is  as  morally  destructive  to  the  official  who  performs  it  as  it 
is  to  the  prisoner  on  whom  it  is  inflicted.  It  is  a  regulation  that, 
in  the  interests  of  common  decency,  must  go. 


XXII.— SO]\[E  LETTERS. 

I  have  had  sent  to  me  copies  of  letters — sometimes  from  mothers, 
sometimes  from  fathers  almost  frantic  with  grief  and  suspense — to 
Lord  Liverpool,  Mr.  Massey,  Sir  Joseph  Ward,  and  Sir  James  Allen. 
Some  of  these  letters  were  pathetic  appeals  for  human  mercy.  Some 
voiced  demands  for  justice,  and  were  full  of  fierce  invective  against 
the  men  and  the  cla.-^s  the  workers  held  responsible  for  their  sorrow. 
One  of  these  was  a  pathetic  appeal  to  the  Minister  of  Defence  from  a 
wife  that  her  hus])and — "a  good  father  and  husband,"  she  says — (who 
had  been  removed  from  the  Templeton  Prison  to  Christchurch  Hospi- 
tal, suffering  from  a  relapse  consequent  on  an  attack  of  influenza) 
might  be  permitted  to  be  nursed  at  his  home  when  convalescent. 

One  letter  to  myscll"  was  from  the  West  Coast.  The  writer  is  the 
wife  of  a  CO. -a  fanner.  She  enclosed  a  copy  of  a  letter  her  hus- 
band sent  to  Sir  James  Allen.  He  was  the  only  man  on  his  little 
farm,  and  when  he  was  drained  off  to  prison  tbe  farm  was  faced 
with  ruin.      He  was  only  ,i;iven  a  little  more  than  a  week's  notice. 

Occasionally  a  father  would  write  to  me  that  his  son  had  been 
dragged  away  by  force,  that  he  believed  he  was  in  Trentham  "clink." 


ARMAGEDDON   OR   CALVARY. 

Occasionally  there  would  come  a  heart-breaking  appreciation  of  my 
own  efforts  on  behalf  of  the  C.O.'s;  occasionally  a  pitiful  plea  that 
Labour  would  endeavour  to  see  that  no  more  C.O.'s  were  forcibly  de- 
ported. Men  wrote  to  me  of  their  experiences  before  the  attestation 
officers  and  the  military  tribunals. 

A  Southern  Objector  (Irish)  who  was  called  upon  to  attest,  and 
refused,  wrote:  "The  officer  fairly  foamed  at  me.  After  a  lively  ex- 
change of  words,  however,  he  took  hold  of  himself  and  cooled  some. 
Then  he  invited  me  into  the  attesting  room,  and  filled  in  the  usual  24 
or  25  lines  of  questions.  He  missed  out  the  "present  war"  lines  and 
asked  me  to  sign,  I  refused.  .  .  .  He  tried  all  manner  of  means 
to  get  me  to  sign  the  blank  order.  Of  course,  I  refused  to  sign  any- 
thing. He  said  he  would  make  it  as  hard  as  he  could  for  at  the 
hearing  of  my  appeal.     I  told  him  it  would  be  his  duty  to  do  that." 

A  prominent  Churchman  wrote  that  a  friend  of  his — also  a  Catho- 
lic— was  drawn  in  the  first  ballot  and  refused  to  answer  the  call.  He 
was  arrested  and  taken  to  the  Detention  Barracks,  and  severely  cross- 
examined — put  through  what  was  next  door  to  the  Third  Degree — by  a 
certain  officer,  by  whom  he  was  finally  told  that  "as  a  member  of  th'e 
Catholic  Church  he  could  no  longer  attend  his  religious  duties  or 
receive  communion  unless  he  would  take  the  oath  and  swear  to  fight 
for  his  king  and  country."      Of  course,  this  was  scandalously  untrue. 

A  Socialist  Objector  was  told  by  a  renegade  Labour  man  at  a 
sitting  of  one  of  the  tribunals  that  he  "ought  to  be  thrashed."  The 
man  guilty  of  that  outburst  was  not  removed  from  his  position. 
A  Religious  Objector  wrote  that  when  he  informed  the  Court  that  his 
trust  was  in  God,  he  was  told  that  he  "was  trusting  in  a  broken  reed." 

Mr.  Maguire  wrote  to  Mr.  P.  T.  Robinson,  of  the  Flaxworkers' 
Union,  an  account  of  his  examination  and  court-martial.  "What  is 
your  religion?"  the  President  asked.  "Roman  Catholic,"  was  the 
answer.  Q.:  "Are  you  aware  that  military  service  is  not  going  against 
the  rules  of  your  Church?"  A.:  "Yes;  but  I  don't  object  from  a 
religious  standpoint,  but  from  a  conscientious  standpoint."  Q.:  "What 
is  your  definition  of  a  Conscientious  Objector?"  A.:  "A  man  who 
refuses  to  be  hounded  into  an  army  for  the  purpose  of  killing  others." 
Q.:  "If  a  maniac  came  along  and  tried  to  kill  your  mother  or  sweet- 
heart, and  if  a  gun  or  sword  were  close  to  you  would  you  use  them?" 
A.:  "Under  the  circumstances,  yes."  "Then,"  said  the  officer,  "that's 
what  the  Germans  are  doing.  You  are  quite  justified  in  taking  the 
uniform."  "No,"  the  prisoner  replied;  "I  should  only  be  preparing  for 
premeditated  murder."  The  officer  returned  to  the  attack.  Q.:  "You 
are  an  Irishman?"  A.:  "Yes."  Q.:  "Have  you  any  grudge  against 
the  English  nation  as  a  whole?"  A.:  "No;  but  I  have  against  the 
English  aristocracy."  Q.:  "I  sec.  You  prefer  to  live  in  luxury  and 
let  some  one  else  go  and  fight  for  you?"  A.:  "I  never  asked  anyone 
K5  .uo.  In  fact,  I  don't  want  them  to  go;  and,  as  for  luxury,  nobody 
gets  that  but  our  stay-at-home  patriots."     When  asked  how  he  pleaded, 

118 


SOME  LP]TTERS. 

Mr.  Maguire  said,  as  to  refusing  the  uniform,  he  must  be  guilty.  "Ah, 
but  you  had  better  plead  not  guilty,"  said  the  officer.  "We  wish  to 
be  your  friend  as  well  as  your  judge."  How  this  worked  out  subse- 
quent events  have  shown. 

Many  letters  set  forth  the  viewpoint  of  the  Religious  Objectors.  It 
will  be  sufficient  to  quote  one.  Prom  Capetown  Military  Barracks,  on 
October  10,  1917,  Mr.  A.  Sanderson  (who  had  been  landed  there  from 
the  Waitemata  because  he  was  ill)  wrote  to  some  friends  at  Lower 
Hutt:— "I  have  always  kad  the  comfort  of  the  Word  wherever  I  have 
gone,  and  especially  have  I  found  peace  in  the  sayings  of  the  Lord 
Jesus  concerning  His  ever-watchful  care  of  His  people  and  the 
Father's  love  of  them.  .  .  .  Love  and  Light  and  Peace  are  in  the 
F'ather  and  our  Lord,  and  in  us  too,  if  we  abide  in  him.  .  .  .  Re- 
member to  let  it  all  rest  with  God  in  Christ;  for  He  has  marked  the 
way  for  each  one  of  us.  So  patience.  Let  us  do  to-day  what  is  need- 
ful and  with  trust  and  prayer     .     .     .     casting  all  our  care  upon  Him." 

Early  in  March,  1918,  the  following  came  to  hand  from  Mark 
Briggs: — "Just  dropping  you  a  line  while  I  have  the  chance.  I  am 
at  Etaples,  in  France,  still  in  "clink,"  but  just  of  the  same  mind  as 
ever.  I  have  had  a  very  rough  time  of  it,  but  have  got  through  alive 
so  far.  I  don't  know  what  they  intend  to  do  w^ith  me,  but  I  am  de- 
termined to  see  it  through,  no  matter  what  the  consequences  may  be. 
I  hare  had  some  great  experiences.  Tell  Dad  I  am  getting  on  as  well 
as  can  be  expected,  that  my  health  is  good,  and  that  I  have  still  hopes- 
of  getting  back  to  see  him  and  all  my  friends  some  day.  Best 
wishes  to  all.  Remember  me  to  all  my  friends;  tell  them  my  message 
is  just  the  same  as  ever:  'Workers  of  the  world,  unite!';  and  to  my 
enemies  you  can  say  that  the  spirit  of  Mark  Briggs  is  still  unbroken." 

A  Christchurch  lady — herself  the  mother  of  a  very  talented  (and 
likewise  very  brave)  lad,  enduring  imprisonment  for  the  .sake  of  his 
religious  principles  wrote  to  Mrs.  Ballanlyne  (Wellington)  on  Feb- 
ruary 3.  1 !)!!».  of  Mr.  T.  P.  Haiiaud.  who  had  just  returned  from 
France:  "He  had  a  wonderful  story  to  tell.  He,  like  Garth,  event- 
ually took  medical  work,  but  signed  nothing  and  accepted  no  pay, 
though  often  near  starving;.  They  olTi-red  him  a  suit  of  clothes  in 
Lytlelton.  btit  when  he  heard  he  had  to  sign  for  it  he  would  have 
none  of  it.  He  is  very  enthusiastic  over  Briqgs's  heroism,  and  says 
they  all  felt  that  he  (Briui^s)  has  the  right  to  be  the  spokesman  for 
the  fourteen;  describes  him  as  utterly  unhrokt^n  intellectually,  and 
able  to  irive  everv  detail  of  tluMr  martyrdom. " 


xxiir.- VAi?vrx(i  vikw points. 

During  the  eourtiiKift  ial  trials  of  the  Conscientious  Objectors,  very 
many  admirable  statements  were  made  by  the  "accused."  presenting 
the  respectiTe  riewpoinis  of  the  men   who   were   prepared   to  sacrifice 

119 


ARMAGEDDON   OR   CALVARY. 

their  liberty  rather  than  sear  their  conscience.  The  two  statements 
which  follow  are  widely  different  in  viewpoint.  The  first  is  the  ob- 
jection of  a  very  sincere  Christian;  the  second  that  of  an  equally 
sincere  Socialist — both  of  them  men  of  lofty  principles,  firm  purpose, 
and  transcending  courage. 

Mr.  Harry  R.  Urquhart,  M.A.,  made  the  following  statement  to 
the  President  and  members  of  the  Courtmartial  by  whom  he  was  tried 
at  Auckland  on  May  9,  1918:— 

I  am  here,  as  you  know,  on  a  charge  of  refusing  to  obey  a  command 
of  one  who  is  termed  my  superior  oflficer.  The  command,  namely,  an 
order  to  submit  to  medical  examination,  seems  so  simple  and  innocent 
in  itself  that  few  people  really  understand  why  it  is  that  a  man,  no 
matter  what  his  philosophy  of  life  may  be,  finds  any  difficulty  in 
obeying  it.  ^ 

When,  moreover,  it  is  made  clear  that  by  submitting  to  medical 
examination  there  is  a  chance  of  being  declared  unfit  for  military 
service  and  of  thus  escaping  punishment  by  imprisonment,  the  posi- 
tion of  one  who  disobeys  such  an  order  becomes  all  the  more  difficult 
to  comprehend. 

Notwithstanding  all  this,  I  have  very  definite  reasons  for  refusing 
to  obey  such  an  order: 

1.  To  submit  willingly  to  medical  examination  is  to  give  the  im- 
.-oression  that  if  a  man  is  found  fit  he  will  have  no  objections  to  going 
on  with  the  rest  of  the  full  military  programme.  If  this  is  not  so, 
and,  like  me,  he  has  really  no  intention  of  becoming  a  soldier,  then 
submission  to  such  an  order  is  a  mere  farce — a  taking  part  in  an 
absolutely  meaningless  proceeding.  Now,  Sir,  to  me  life  is  too  real  a 
thing  for  such  paltry  trifling;  hence  I  cannot  submit  even  to  this 
apparently  simple  and  innocent  command. 

2.  An  order  to  submit  to  medical  examination  is  the  first  of  a  long 
series  of  military  orders.  If  a  man  has  not  the  slightest  intention  of 
taking  the  later  orders,  then  he  should  refuse  to  take  the  first;  for  the 
sooner  his  position  is  made  clear  to  himself  and  to  all  others  the  less 
confusion  of  thought  will  be  caused. 

3.  There  is  certainly  a  chance  of  a  man  being  declared  medically 
unfit  as  a  result  of  this  examination  and  of  thus  escaping  many  un- 
pleasant experiences,  and  of  even  being  permitted  to  follow  his  usual 
occupation,  but,  Sir,  men  who  take  the  stand  which  I  am  taking  are 
not  seeking  to  make  things  easy  for  themselves — they  are  only  anxious 
to  prove  faithful  to  the  light  they  have,  and  they  would  consider  it 
a  species  of  moral  cowardice  to  attempt  to  slip  through  a  loophole 
such   as   the   medical   examination   sometimes   affords. 

4.  It  is  good,  too,  for  officials  to  be  forced  into  the  position  of  deal- 
ing with  men  who  refuse  to  obey  orders  which  they  know  are  in 
direct  conflict  with  the  Divine  Revelation  that  is  guiding  our  lives. 

Officials  from  the  days  of  Pontius  Pilate  have  at  times  been  deeply 

128 


VARYING  VIEWPOINTS. 

concerned  when  they  have  found  themselves,  in  the  execution  of  what 
they  deem  to  be  their  duty,  pronouncing  sentence  on  men  whom  they 
know  to  be  thoroughly  sincere  and  whose  lives  show  that  they  seek 
only  the  true  good  of  their  fellow-men. 

Many  an  official  at  such  a  time  feels  himself  a  divided  creature — 
he  fain  would  do  that  as  a  man  which  he  dare  not  do  as  an  official. 
As  an  official  he  is  forced  to  condemn  and  pass  sentence  on  what  as 
a  man  he  would  most  willingly  pardon  and  condone. 

The  truth  of  Christ's  teaching  may  then  come  home  to  him  with 
great  forcefulness — that  no  man  can  serve  two  masters.  He  realises, 
possibly  for  the  first  time,  that  he  must  act  as  a  man  of  independent 
thought  or  as  an  official  bound  down  by  rules  and  regulations.  He 
sees  clearly  the  impossibility  of  serving  both  God  and  Mammon,  of 
Deing  true  to  himself  as  a  man  and  true  to  the  State  as  an  official. 

Ii  my  be  that  he  will  learn  a  lesson — one  or  the  most  important  he 
will  ever  learn — that  a  man  must  be  a  man  first  of  all,  an  official 
somewhere  after  that  or  not  at  all,  according  to  the  light  revealed 
to  him. 

I  am  not  a  Quaker,  and  never  have  been  one.  but  I  profess  to  be 
a  follower  of  Jesus  Christ — it  may  be,  like  Peter  of  old,  one  who  fol- 
lows at  a  distance — still,  I  am  seeking  to  follow  and,  as  the  days  and 
weeks  go  by,  to  lessen  the  distance  which  separates  my  life  from  that 
of  the  Master. 

I  feel  very  definitely  the  leading  of  Christ — that  Divine  guidance 
which  is  promised  to  every  man  who  seeks  it.  With  the  pathway  so 
definitely  pointed  out  to  me,  it  would  be  base  treachery  on  my  part 
to  obey  commands,  even  of  the  highest  officials  of  the  land,  when 
those  commands  mean  the  surrender  of  the  light  I  have  and  the 
treading  of  a  pathway  which  I  know  to  be  fraught  with  darkness  and 
confusion. 

The  question  of  paramount  importance  to  me,  then,  is  not  how 
should  the  crowd  who  have  not  this  light  act.  but  how  should  the  few 
who  have  it  act? 

In  such  a  crisi.s  as  the  present  it  is  assumed  that  the  individual 
cannot  do  any  independent  thinking,  or,  if  he  does,  it  is  deemed  to  be 
valueless.  Now,  history  right  down  through  the  ages  has  proved 
such  an  assumption  to  be  false.  It  has  not  been  men  in  masses  but 
men  in  ones  and  twos  who  have  been  responsible  in  the  first  place 
for  the  change  of  thought  which  has  led  to  important  reforms.  A 
law,  then,  which  ignores  such  a  fundamental  axiom  of  all  true  pro- 
gress is  a  law  which  every  wise  man  will  expect   to  be  broken. 

Even  granted  that  the  Christian  were  willing  to  wear  the  uniform 
and  accept  military  pay,  although  as  a  matter  of  fact  he  could  not 
possibly  identify  him.'^clf  so  closely  with  your  philosophy  of  life  with- 
out most  gravely  and  seriously  jeopardising  the  cause  for  which  he 
stands,  still  the  military  authorities  on  their  part  could  not  possibly 
allow  him  to  enlist,  because — however  willing  he  might   be   to  allow 

121 


ARMAGEDDON   OR   CALVARY. 

his  body  to  be  clothed  with  a  military  uniform — he  certainly  will  not 
and  cannot  permit  any  earthly  authority  to  dress  his  thoughts  in  a 
uniform  of  approved  pattern.  In  other  words,  you  may  dress  him  in 
a  uniform  and  so  make  him  look  like  you,  but  you  can  never  force 
him  to  think  like  you.  If  he  goes  at  all,  he  must  go  as  a  free  man 
and  speak  those  things  which  God  moves  him  to  say.  Right  along 
the  line  he  would  be  a  source  of  danger  to  you,  for  one  Christian 
in  your  ranks  who  is  convinced  of  the  sinfulness  of  the  whole  mili- 
tary position  would  be  a  constant  source  of  danger  to  your  cause.  You 
dare  not  let  him  go — it  would  be  madness  on  your  part  to  seek  to  force 
him  to  go. 

The  true  Christian  .follows  the  light  as  far  as  God  reveals  it  to 
him.  The  truer  he  is  to  this  revealed  guidance  the  more  light  he 
receives  and  the  less  the  world  understands  him.  It  is  perhaps  suflSi- 
cient  if  he  understands  himself.  But,  as  he  steps  more  and  more  from 
the  line  which  the  world  thinks  it  wisest  to  follow,  as  he  diverges 
more  and  more  from  that  path  which  is  mapped  out  by  convention 
and  expediency,  the  more  impossible  does  ft  become  for  him  to  accept 
freely  a  line  of  life  or  a  definite  work  set  down  by  another.  Hence 
the  Christian  may  find  it  impossible  to  accept  alternative  non-combat- 
ant work.  Your  only  course  is  to  leave  him  alone  to  follow  that  plan 
which  God  has  revealed  to  him. 

To  me  the  words  of  John  concerning  Christ — that  He  is  the  true 
light  which  lighteth  every  man  that  cometh  into  the  world — and  the 
words  of  Jesus  Christ  Himself  when  He  says,  "I  am  the  way,  the 
truth  and  the  life,"  are  fraught  with  very  deep  meaning.  I  realise 
that  he  who  ventures  to  seek  and  to  follow  this  light  must  expect  to 
come  into  conflict  with  conventional  ideas  as  to  what  is  and  what 
is  not  expedient.  He  must  be  prepared  to  oppose  popular  opinion;  he 
must,  even  at  the  risk  of  being  misrepresented  and  misunderstood, 
very  definitely  refuse  to  move  a  step  out  of  that  pathway  which  is 
pointed  out  to  him  by  Divine  Revelation. 

Such  a  follower  of  Christ  will  walk  with  all  men  as  far  as  he 
possibly  can — he  will  not  lightly  nor  willingly  break  the  laws  of  his 
country;  but  he  reserves,  and  must  reserve,  to  himself  the  right  to 
break  any  law,  military  or  otherwise,  which  comes  into  conflict  with 
that   Divine   law   revealed   from   above. 

At  a  time  like  the  present  he  arrives  at  the  parting  of  the  ways. 
Two  voices  speak  to  him — there  is  first  that  of  the  military  authori- 
ties, loud  and  insistent,  but  to  the  Christian  there  is  yet  another  voice 
-still  and  quiet — a  voice  which  can  be  heard  only  when  the  soul  of 
man   is  hushed  to  stillness  and   is  eagerly  listening  for  it. 

I  hear  most  distinctly  these  two  voices.  I  see  the  beckoning  figures, 
pointing;  out  their  opposing  ways;  hut  in  my  heart  and  mind  lingers 
no  bewildering  doubt.  I  obey,  gladly  and  willingly,  the  voice  and 
bo(  kf>iiinL'  hand  of  Him  whom  alone  I  regard  as  my  superior  officer. 

Multitudes  cannot  understand  such  a  philosophy  of  life;  but  this  is 

122 


VARYING  VIE^VPOTNTS. 

only  another  proof  of  the  marvellous  accuracy  of  Christ's  knowledge 
of  men  when  He  predicted  that  such  would  be  the  case — for  He  said, 
"The  world  cannot  receive  the  Spirit  of  Truth  because  it  seeth  Him 
not,  neither  knoweth  Him." 

The  Prosecuting  Counsel  has  told  you  that  T  am  a  soldier;  that 
the  Military  Service  Act  of  1916  has  created  me  one  in  spite  of  my 
opposition  to  the  whole  military  programme.  I  should  like  to  say, 
Mr.  President,  that  you  cannot  make  a  soldier  of  a  man  by  Act  of 
Parliament,  any  more  than  you  can  make  a  Hindu  of  him  by  a 
similar  process.  To  make  a  soldier  of  a  man  you  must  secure  him 
both  body  and  soul.  No  Government  has  yet  been  able  to  do  this.  The 
fact  that  there  are  scores  of  Objectors  in  your  prisons  is  proof  that 
an  Act  of  Parliament  cannot  make  soldiers  of  men  against  their  wills — 
it  can  only  make  prisoners  of  them,  and  as  such  they  are  not  a 
help  but  a  hindrance  to  your  cause. 

So,  when  the  Prosecuting  Counsel  tells  me  that  in  refusing  to  obc^- 
a  military  command  I  am  committing  the  gravest  offence  that  can 
be  preferred  against  a  soldier,  I  am  not  overwhelmed  with  dismay.  I 
regard  his  own  position  as  an  infinitely  more  serious  one — for,  in 
stating  that  the  religious  or  conscientious  scruples  of  an  accused  man 
can  have  no  weight  with  the  Court  and  must  not  receive  any  con- 
sideration, he  takes  up  arms  not  against  me,  but  against  God  Him- 
self. Sir,  you  are  surely  not  amazed  when  I  tell  you  that,  in  spite 
of  the  so-called  grave  offence  I  have  committed  against  military 
law,  I  infinitely  prefer  my  position  to  that  of  any  member  of  this 
Court,  for  my  offence  is  one  against  the  law  of  man  alone:  yours, 
against  the  law  and  will  of  God  Himself. 

Mr.  Colin  R.  Robertson  was  courtmartialled  at  Auckland  on  Friday, 
December  7,  1918,  for  refusing  to  be  a  soldier.  When  requested  by 
the  Court  to  state  his  pei-sonal  objections  to  military  service,  he  made 
the  following  statement,  to  which  the  Court  listened  patiently  and 
without  any  interruptions   whatever.     He  said:- 

I  am  a  Socialist,  therefore  my  objections  to  service  in  the  .N'.Z.E.F. 
as  a  conscript  arc  based  entirely  on  Socialist  principles.  I  am  op- 
posed to  conscription  because,  first,  it  is  against  the  best  interest  of 
humanity,  it  is  a  machine  of  war's  ci-eation  for  war  waging,  and  no 
one.  1  think,  would  dare  say  that  war  in  itself  is  in  bumanity'.s  inter- 
ests. 

Secondly,  it  is  nndeniocratic.  (\siiecially  so  in  tlie  niannci-  in  which 
it    has   been   ushered    into   New   Zealand. 

War  is  the  jjioduct  of  the  system  of  social  organisation,  or  rather 
disorganisation,  under  which  we  in  this  a.ize  live.  It  is  the  product 
of  any  social  system  under  which  the  many  are  ccononiically  depend- 
(^nt  on  the  few  for  tlit>  liulii  to  work  in  order  that  they  may  obtain 
the   means  of  subsist enc(\ 

1 1':', 


ARMAGEDDON   OR   CALVARY. 

Under  the  capitalistic  state  of  society  the  working-class  receive 
only  a  small  portion  of  the  wealth  they  produce  in  the  form  of  wages; 
the  balance  is  retained  by  the  capitalists  in  the  form  of  rent,  inter- 
est, and  profit.  The  balance  becomes  capital,  and  the  capitalists  seek 
fresh  fields  for  its  profitable  investment. 

Since  the  capitalists  of  all  countries  are  in  the  same  position,  they 
must  compete  one  with  the  other  for  the  limited  fields  in  which  this 
accumulated  capital  can  be  profitably  employed.  Their  interests  con- 
flict, war  ensues;  thus,  to  my  mind,  the  causes  of  all  wars  are  econ- 
omic, all  are  capitalistic. 

In  the  war  being  waged  in  Europe  to-day,  I  see  clearly  the  clashing 
of  capitalistic  interests;  the  same  envious  glances  cast  by  one  nation 
at  the  trade  of  another  that  precede  all  wars    preceded  this  one. 

These  things  do  not  concern  the  v/orking-class  of  any  country.  Go 
where  you  will  you  will  find  the  workers  are  dependent  on  the  capi- 
talists for  the  right  to  live;  go  where  you  will,  you  will  find  the 
workers  living  in  the  same  poverty  and  want,  you  will  find  the  same 
jails,  lunatic  asylums,  poor-houses,  brothels,  and  all  the  other  evils 
of  our  present  wage-system.  Therefore,  it  will  be  seen  the  workers 
of  all  countries  have  the  same  troubles — to  wit,  an  insufliciency  of  the 
necessities  of  life.  They  are  all  alike  struggling  to  improve  their 
lot  by  striving  for  higher  wages,  shorter  hours  of  labour,  and  more 
sanitary  conditions  of  life,  all  struggling  to  secure  a  little  more  of 
the  wealth  they  produce,  and  ultimately  to  secure  their  independence 
from  the  economic  oppression  of  capitalism. 

I  realise  this  and  therefore  refuse  to  participate  in  this  or  any 
other  war.  We  are  told  it  is  a  war  of  freedom.  Freedom  from  what? 
The  only  freedom  I  can  see  to  strive  for  is  freedom  of  the  masses  of 
wage-slaves  from  their  want  and  misery,  freedom  from  the  economic 
oppression  of  capitalism. 

We  are  told  it  is  to  punish  the  perpetrators  of  the  horrors  (real  or 
alleged)  on  the  women  and  children  of  Belgium.  To  that  I  would 
reply:  that,  if  there  is  anything  in  the  natural  law  that  every  crime 
brings  its  own  punishment,  then  the  crimes  that  were  practised  upon 
the  unfortunate  natives  of  the  Congo  in  the  interests  of  Belgian  capital, 
are  bringing  theirs.  The  unfortunate  part  is,  that  many  of  the  guiltless 
workers  of  Belgium  are  suffering  along  with  those  who  were  respon- 
sible. 

We  are  told  it  is  to  secure  for  the  small  nations  independence;  to 
that  I  would  reply:  If  that  is  the  case,  why  is  not  independence 
granted  to  Finland  by  Russia  and  to  Ireland  by  Britain? 

I  am  opposed  to  participation  in  this  war  or  any  other,  on  the 
grounds  that  all  wars  are  wrong  and  against  the  best  interests  of 
humanity. 

I  refuse  to  hate  the  working-class  men  and  women  of  Germany  or 
any  other  country  allied  to  her;  I  refuse  to  slay  and  maim  the  workers 
of  those  countries.     I  refuse  to  be  the  cause  of  depriving  any  German 

124 


VARYING  VIEWPOINTS. 

woman  of  her  life's  partner,  and  1  decline  to  be  the  means  of  any 
child  of  Germany  shedding  one  tear  over  the  loss  of  a  livinp;  father. 

For  these  reasons  I  must  decline  to  be  a  soldier,  or  recognise  the 
right  of  any  Govenment  to  force  me  to  become  one.  I  must  decline 
to  recognise  the  right  of  any  orders  given  to  me  by  an  alleged  superior 
officer;  therefore,  I  have  declined  to  be  medically  examined,  especially 
when  I  know  that  such  examination  is  only  for  the  purpose  of  deter- 
mining my  physical  fitness  to  take  human  life. 

I  seek  to  make  this  world  a  little  better  for  my  having  been  in  it, 
than  it  may  otherwise  have  been,  an(^  narticipation  in  war  is  not 
tending  towards  that  ideal. 

I  quite  realise  that  for  my  views  and  principles  I  shall  have  to 
undergo  certain  punishment,  but  however  severe  that  may  be,  even 
should  it  involve  execution,  I  would  still  maintain  the  same  attitude. 

I  would  rather  suffer  the  agonies  of  a  million  hells  for  a  period  of 
time  covering  a  million  eternities  than  develop  legs  on  my  stomach 
and  crawl,  centipede  fashion,  into  a  heaven  (there  to  bask  in  the 
sunshine  of  an  orthodox  God)  by  violating  the  principle  of  humani- 
tarianism,  which  I  hold  dearer  than  life  itself. 

Finally,  I  definitely  state  that  I  decline  to  perform  one  single  action 
that  would  tend  to  leave  what  is  now  the  live  pulsating  body  of  a 
German  working  man,  with  hopes  and  ideals  perhaps  the  same  as 
mine,  on  a  bloodstained  field  of  battle  a  mangled  mass  of  humanity, 
with  the  lif«-blood  welling  from  great  gaping  wounds,  enriching  the 
earth  from  which  he  sprung  and  to  which  he  will  now  return. 

Mr.  Robertson  then  proceeded  to  make  the  following  offer:  — 

I  am  prepared  to  offer  myself  to  the  military  authorities  for  one 
purpose  and  on  one  condition.  It  is  only  by  research  and  experiment 
that  medical  science  has  reached  the  stage  of  development  that  it  has. 
It  can  only  advance  by  still  further  research  and  experiment.  This 
war  has  provided  many  opportunities  for  the  advancement  of  anti- 
septic surgery,  many  operations  have  been  performed  which  before 
the  war  were  considered  impossible.  .Many  cases,  I  believe,  of  trans- 
fusion of  blood,  grafting  of  skin,  flesh,  or  hone,  etc.,  have  been  success- 
fully dealt  with. 

Now,  I  am  a  healthy  individual.  I  have  lived  a  clean  life,  have  no 
vices  that  I  know  of  such  as  drinking,  smoking,  etc..  have  never  had 
a  day's  constitutional  illness  in  my  life,  so  would  consider  that  my 
blood,  bone,  and  flesh  would  he  in  a  good  enough  condition,  that  por- 
tion of  my  body  could  he  grafted  on  to  the  bodies  of  individuals  who 
may  have  been  maimed,  with  a  reasonable  hope  of  the  injured  person 
being  benefitted. 

I  therefore  am  prepared  to  offer  my  body  to  the  military  authori- 
ties for  use  in  any  hospital  for  the  r^rpose  herein  stated  for  the 
benefit  of  any   soldier  who   ha.'^   h(>en   maimed  at    the   front.     The  only 

125 


ARMAGEDDON   OR   CALVARY. 

condition  I  impose  is  that  no  soldier  after  such  treatment  shall  be 
re-ordered  to  the  front. 

I  make  this  offer  in  the  hope  that  it  will  be  accepted,  and  that 
because  I  really  wish  to  do  something  for  the  good  of  humanity. 
For  the  sake  of  the  millions  yet  unborn  and  with  the  hope  that  the 
knowledge  of  surgery  may  be  increased  for  the  purpose  of  minimising 
the  sufferings  of  those  unborn  millions  may  be  heir  to,  I  make  this 
offer,  it  being  the  only  way  I  can  conscientiously  assist  the  military 
authorities. 


XXIY.— WANGANUI   REVELATIONS. 

I  have  already  mentioned  that  the  treatment  of  the  Conscientious 
Objectors  was  made  a  part  of  the  Labour  Party's  indictment  of  the 
National  Government  in  the  Grey  campaign.  My  last  election  address 
in  that  fight  was  delivered  at  Reefton  on  the  eve  of  the  polling  day, 
May  27.  On  my  arrival  at  Reefton  I  found  that  Mr.  Mark  Fagan, 
secretary  of  the  Inangahua  Miners'  Union,  had  that  day  received  a 
letter  from  Mr.  Harry  Wilson,  a  member  of  the  Union,  and  also  a  CO., 
describing  the  treatment  of  himself  and  other  C.O.'s  at  Wanganui 
Detention  Prison.  Mr.  Wilson's  letter  was  dated  May  23,  and  had 
been  written  from  Alexandra  Detention  Barracks  at  Wellington.  He 
first  of  all  recounted  his  own  experiences  after  being  drawn  in  the 
ballot  and  while  "wanted,"  his  arrest,  his  first  sentence  of  28  days' 
detention,  his  second  refusal  to  accept  the  kit,  and  his  consequent 
remand  for  court-martial,  which  trial  he  was  awaiting  at  the  time  of 
writing.  He  casually  mentioned  that  he  had  met  quite  a  number  of 
C.O.'s  since  he  had  been  seized — "men  who  have  completed  eleven 
months'  sentences  and  are  back  again  for  their  two  years" — and  then 
proceeded  to  say: — 

"We  spent  part  of  our  detention  at  Wanganui  Barracks,  and  that 
is  what  I  want  to  let  you  know  most  about,  as  I  think  it  wants  as 
much  light  thrown  on  it  as  possible.  I  want  you  to  give  Harry  Hol- 
land the  following  particulars  regarding  the  conduct  of  that  place  so 
that  he  may  be  able  to  use  it  in  his  election  campaign,  though  1  am 
afraid  there  will  not  be  very  much  time  after  this  arrives,  still  I 
hope  he  will  make  the  most  of  it  there,  and  also  through  the  medium 
of  'The  Worker.'  What  I  have  to  complain  about  is  the  treatment 
meted  out  to  Conscientious  Objectors  at  Wanganui.  Half-a-dozen  of 
us,  including  three  C.O.'s.  were  taken  u])  there  a  little  over  three 
weeks  ago,  evidently  with  the  intention  of  breaking  us  in.  We  had 
not  been  in  the  place  an  hour  when  I  was  given  three  days  'dummy' 
on  bread  and  water  for  refusing  to  '  Sir  '  the  officer  in  charge,  and  next 

126 


WANGANUI  REVELATIONS. 

day  Tom  Moynihan  was  handed  out  forty-eight  hours  of  the  same  for 
some  like  trivial  offence.  I  had  three  days'  fast  and  Tom  had  nothing 
to  eat  while  he  was  in  either.  Dry  bread  does  not  appeal  very  strongly 
to  either  of  us.  We  had  not  been  out  twenty-four  hours  before  I  fell 
foul  of  the  officer  again  and  this  time  was  ordered  two  hours'  pack 
drill.  To  do  pack  drill  the  victim  must  have  a  uniform,  and  as  I 
had  none  they  decided  to  get  one  for  me.  When  it  arrived  I  refused 
to  put  it  on,  but  that  did  not  trouble  them  much;  they  just  chucked 
me  around  the  cell  a  bit  to  let  me  know  they  were  not  joking,  and 
when  I  still  refused  to  change,  one  brave  hero  went  and  got  a  pair 
of  handcuffs,  and  after  cuffing  my  hands  behind  my  back,  stood  me 
on  my  feet,  and  then  playfully  bashed  my  head  against  the  wall, 
stunning  me  for  a  few  seconds.  They  continued  knocking  me  about 
a  while  longer,  and  then  decided,  as  I  would  not  put  the  uniform  on, 
to  put  it  on  for  me,  which  they  did,  being  not  over  gentle  In  the 
operation. 

"The  next  one  to  be  operated  on  was  Tom  Moynihan.  Tom  is 
well  known  on  the  Coast.  They  brought  him  a  uniform  one  Sunday 
morning  and  ordered  him  to  dress  in  it.  Of  course,  Tom  was  having 
none,  so  three  or  four  hopped  into  him,  and  after  handing  out  punches 
and  kicks,  one  of  which  landed  over  the  heart,  and  which  he  still 
feels  the  effects  of,  they  put  the  uniform  on  him  and  ordered  him  two 
hours'  pack  drill.  He  refused  to  carry  a  rifle  and  also  refused  to 
march,  so  they  tied  the  gun  to  his  side,  and  then  started  him  off 
round  the  yard,  by  turns  pushing,  punching,  kicking,  and  dragging 
him  by  the  hair  of  his  head.  Whenever  they  pushed  him  off  his  feet, 
as  they  did  on  several  occasions,  they  put  the  boot  into  him  until  he 
got  up  again.  This  sort  of  thing  went  on  for  over  an  hour,  and  the 
language  of  the  whole  crowd  was  absolutely  disgusting.  Rather  nice 
exercise  for  Sunday  morning. 

"The  next  victim,  a  new  arrival,  was  dealt  with  the  next  evening 
less  than  an  hour  after  he  arrived.  They  introduced  a  little  variation 
for  him.  Instead  of  the  gun  and  pack,  they  handcuffed  him  and  then 
proceeded  to  drag  him  round  with  ropes  round  his  neck  until  he 
could  scarcely  stand;  they  also  made  a  point  of  pushing  him  against 
the  wall  at  each  turn,  so  that  by  the  time  they  had  finished  l)oth  sides 
of  his  face  wci'c  Wke  a  piece  of  raw  steak.  To  tinish  up  witli  thej 
gave  him  a  cold  bath. 

"When  the  rest  of  us  '.sent  out  to  wash  (we  were  always  locked 
up  when  any  busines.s  of  this  kind  was  on),  wo  saw  splaslu'S  of  1)looJ 
all  round  the  yard  and  also  on  the  walls.  ...  If  tlu>so  outrages 
were  perpetrated  by  CliMinans  they  would  he  comleuHU'd  as  ])rutal 
atrocities;  hut.  of  course.  I  am  sure  the  i)coi>lc  of  Nt  w  Z(>aland  do 
not  know  what  is  going  on  in  Wanganui.  and  it  is  up  to  those  of  us  that 
do  know  to  expose  it  as  inucli  as  possible  and  also  denumd  an  enquiry 
into  the  treatment  of  Objectors  in  that  hell,  otherwise  they  will  go 
just    a    little    too    far    one    of    iliese    days    and    kill    somebody. 

127 


ARMAGEDDON    OK    CALVARY. 

Perhaps  the  Military  authorities  imagine  they  are  making  soldiers  by 
this  sort  of  treatment,  but,  as  far  as  I  can  see,  they  are  just  manu- 
facturing rebels.     Lieutenant  Crampton  is  in  charge  of  the  Barracks. 

"Hoping  this  arrives  in  time  for  Harry  to  make  use  of  it,  and  also 
hoping  he  sends  it  along  for  all  it  is  worth.  With  regards  to  old  chums, 
sincerely  hoping  they  are  all  doing  well  and  keeping  fit. — I  remain, 
fraternally  yours,  HARRY  WILSON. 

"The  following  is  the  list  of  those  who  were  witnesses  to  what 
occurred,  and  who  authorise  me  to  sign  their  names: — Jim  Casey, 
Thos.  Moynihan,  R.  G.  Halkett,  J.  Boyle,  A.  Beaton.  J.  Fitzpatrick,  T. 
Bell,  H.  Wilson." 

That  evening  I  quoted  for  the  benefit  of  a  crowded  meeting  the 
statement  contained  in  Mr.  Wilson's  letter.  This  was  the  first  occasion 
on  which  a  public  exposure  was  made  of  the  Wanganui  cruelties.  On 
reaching  Christchurch,  on  my  way  back  to  Wellington  after  the  elec- 
tion had  been  won,  I  received  a  letter  from  Mrs.  Beck  (secretary  of 
the  Women's  International  League),  who  had  received  a  similar  letter 
to  that  sent  to  Mr.  Fagan,  and  who  urged  that  I  should  endeavour  to 
arrange  a  deputation  to  Sir  James  Allen  for  the  purpose  of  both 
protesting  against  and  ventilating  the  outrages.  Arriving  home  the 
first  week  in  June,  I  speedily  got  into  communication  with 
the       Minister's       oflSce.  On       Tuesday,      June      11,      I      'phoned 

Mr.  Dixon  (Sir  James  Allen's  private  secretary)  asking 
him  to  endeavour  to  arrange  with  the  Minister  to  receive  a  depu- 
tation of  Labour  bodies  and  other  organisations  with  reference  to  the 
alleged  ill-treatment  of  Religious,  Socialist,  and  other  Conscientious 
Objectors  in  detention  and  prison  in  New  Zealand  and  abroad.  Mr. 
Dixon  replied  by  'phone  next  day  saying  that  the  Minister  suggested 
that,  to  save  both  time  and  expense,  we  should  make  our  representa- 
tions in  writing.  This  suggestion  I  placed  before  the  organisers  of 
the  deputation,  whose  opinion  was  that  the  deputation  ought  to  take 
place — an  opinion  that  I  fully  concurred  in.  Accordingly,  on  June  14 
I  addressed  a  letter  to  the  Minister  urging  that  he  should  consent  to 
receive  the  deputation,  and  pointing  out  that  the  outrages  which  were 
alleged  to  have  been  committed  were  so  extremely  serious  that  the 
matter  ought  to  receive  immediate  attention,  and  finally  requesting  that 
the  Minister  would  take  the  deputation  on  Thursday  of  the  following 
week.  To  this  letter  the  Minister  replied  on  June  19,  regretting  that 
his  time  had  been  too  much  occupied  to  permit  him  to  make  an  ap- 
pointment or  receive  the  deputation  as  desired,  and  adding:  — 

"Departmental  enquiries  had,  however,  been  held  about  Wanganui 
prior  to  the  receipt  of  your  letter,  and,  indeed,  prior  to  your  original 
enquiry  by  telephone.  I  am  anxious  that  the  public  should  be  satisfied 
that  everything  is  being  done  to  ascertain  the  truth  of  the  rumours, 
and  have  already  arranged  with  the  Minister  of  Justice  that  a  Magis- 
trate shall  go  fully  into  the  question.      This  enquiry  should  be  held 

128 


WANGANUI   ItEVELATIOXS. 

within  the  next  day  or  two.     In  the  circumstances,  do  you  still  think 
it  still  necessary  to  hold  the  deputation?" 

It  is  necessary  to  digress  here  to  point  out  that  a  letter  containint? 
similar  facts  to  those  covered  in  the  letters  to  Mr.  Fagan  and  Mrs. 
Beck  had  also  been  sent  to  the  editor  of  "Truth,"  by  whom  it  had 
been  submitted  to  the  Defence  authorities;  and,  when  the  Government 
eventually  took  action,  it  issued  its  instructions  as  though  the  letter 
to  "Truth"  was  the  sole  matter  it  had  to  go  upon.  It  will,  however, 
be  noted  that  the  letter  of  instruction  to  the  Magistrate,  Mr.  Hewitt, 
was  dated  June  20 — the  day  following  the  Minister's  reply  to  my  letter 
of  June  14,  and  the  exact  day  on  which  my  second  letter  was  de- 
livered  to   the    Minister. 

To  return  to  the  correspondence.  On  June  20  1  replied  to  Sii* 
James  Allen  (my  letter  being  delivered  by  special  messenger),  stating 
that  there  was  a  unanimous  wish  on  the  part  of  those  concerned 
that  the  deputation  should  take  place  on  the  following  day  (Friday), 
or,  if  this  was  not  possible,  at  10.30  or  11  a.m.  on  Saturday,  as  on 
the  latter  day  I  was  booked  to  leave  for  Auckland  by  the  mid-day  ex- 
press. Sir  James  answered  promptly  by  wire  on  the  same  day, 
regretting  that,  owing  to  his  own  contemplated  departure  from  Wel- 
lington on  the  following  Monday,  he  could  not  arrange  to  meet  the 
deputation  on  either  Friday  or  Saturday  as  desired,  but  intimating 
that  he  would  be  returning  to  Wellington  on  June  30. 

This  meant  a  delay  that  was  altogether  too  long  in  the  opinion  of 
the  deputationists,  and  on  June  21 — all  efforts  to  secure  the  deputa- 
tion having  apparently  proved  futile — I  wrote  to  the  Minister  ex- 
pressing regret  at  his  inability  to  meet  the  deputation.  In  the 
course  of  my  letter,  which  was  necessarily  lengthy.  I  said:  — 

"Under  these  circumstances,  and  in  view  of  the  delay  which  must 
take  place  before  they  could  otherwise  be  heard,  the  members  of  the 
proposed  deputation  have  asked  me  to  furnish  you  with  an  outline  of 
the  main  facts  which  they  desired  to  bring  under  your  notice. 

"They  also  desire  me  to  make  the  strongest  possible  protest  against 
the  .Magisterial  inquiry  re  Wanganui  Prison  being  conducted  in  cam- 
era. They  insist  that  the  public  have  a  right  to  hear  the  evidence 
from  both  sides;  and  they  further  protest  that  an  inquiry  at  which 
the  men  most  concerned  will  not  be  entitled  to  be  directly  re- 
presented, and  apparently  some  of  whom  will  not  even  be  called  as 
witnesses,  will  not  have  any  very  satisfying  effect  so  far  as  the  general 
public  is  concerned. 

"The  principal  facts  in  possession  of  the  parties  desiring  the  depu- 
tation are  as  under:  — 

"It  is  alleged  that  one  Conscientious  Objector  who  was  taken  to 
Wanganui  Prison  about  the  end  of  April  last,  was  threatened  by  an 
officer,  subjected  to  24  hours  in  the  punishment  cell  for  refusing  drill, 
5  120 


ARMAGEDDON   OR   CALVARY. 

then  sentenced  to  another  24  hours  for  'insolence' — his  judge  and 
accuser  being  the  same  officer.  When  he  refused  to  put  on  the  uniform 
he  was  forcibly  dressed,  and  was  knocked  down  and  kicked  in  the 
ribs  while  down.  He  eventually  took  the  uniform  off.  He  was  forcibly 
dressed  a  second  time,  and  was  again  knocked  about,  and  told  that  if 
he  took  the  uniform  off  again  he  would  be  murdered.  He  again  took 
it  off,  and  was  yet  again  forcibly  dressed.  This  time  he  had  an  801b. 
pack  fastened  on  his  back  and  a  rifle  was  tied  to  his  hand.  While 
his  hands  were  tied  his  head  was  bumped  against  the  wall;  then  he 
was  pushed  out  into  the  yard,  ordered  to  march,  and  struck  between 
the  shoulders  with  the  butt  of  a  rifle.  This  caused  the  rifle  fastened  to 
him  to  fall  from  its  position.  He  was  ordered  to  hold  the  rifle  up, 
one  of  the  guards  telling  him  if  he  failed  to  do  so  he  would  knock 

his  b head  off.     He  refused  to  iiold  it,  and  the  guard  banged  it 

up  against  his  ear  and  the  side  of  his  face  till  the  blood  was  streaming 
down  his  face.  After  that  they  tied  the  rifle  with  thick  string  to  his 
neck  so  that  it  couldn't  fall.  They  then  ordered  him  once  more  to 
march;  and  when  he  refused,  they  took  it  in  turns  two  at  a  time  to 
force  him  round  the  ring  and  punched  him  till  he  was  black  and  blue. 
He  was  then  dragged  along  by  the  hair  of  the  head.  A  handful  of  hair 
was  dragged  out.  This  was  more  than  he  could  stand,  and  he  struck 
his  assailant  and  knocked  him  down,  whereupon  he  was  rushed  by 
three  of  the  guards,  struck,  knocked  down,  and  kicked  while  down. 
Asked  by  an  officer  was  he  going  to  give  in,  and  replying  that  he  was 
not,  he  was  subjected  to  still  further  assault,  was  knocked  down  three 
times,  kicked  on  the  shins  and  banged  against  the  wall.  An  officer 
threatened  him  that  he  would  get  this  treatment  every  day  as  long 
as  he  was  there.  During  one  of  these  series  of  assaults,  he  was 
kicked  over  the  heart,  and  suffered  for  weeks  as  a  result.  Eventually, 
worn  out  physically  and  mentally,  he  gave  in  and  took  the  uniform. 

"It  is  further  alleged  that  another  Conscientious  Objector,  refusing 
to  take  the  uniform,  was  forcibly  dressed  in  denims,  handcuffed,  and 
then  dragged  round  the  yard  by  means  of  a  rope  tied  round  his  neck. 
He  was  kicked  and  punched  at  the  same  time  and  pushed  against  the 
wall,  and  at  last  (it  is  alleged)  'his  face  was  like  a  piece  of  steak, 
and  drops  of  blood  were  to  be  seen  all  round  the  yard  and  on  the 
wall.'  He  was  beaten  on  the  hand  with  a  stick  and  his  hand  was 
swollen  abnormally.  After  having  been  subjected  to  this  treatment, 
he  was  forcibly  given  a  cold  bath. 

"A  number  of  other  Objectors  are  alleged  to  have  received  practi- 
cally similar  treatment." 

I  also  gave  the  Minister  an  outline  of  the  Featherston  cases  re- 
ferred to  in  my  Wellington  North  opening  speech,  and  reminded  him 
that  Mr.  Massey,  after  that  speech,  had  told  the  press  that  the  matter 
would  be  enquired  into — a  promise  which  had  not  been  kept.  I  also 
dealt  at  some  length  with  the  cases  of  the  deported  men,  and  parti- 

130 


WANGANUI  KRVELATIONS. 

cularly  with  the  statement  that  they  had  been  subjected  to  "cruci- 
fixion," otherwise  Field  Punishment  No.  1,  pointing  out  that,  so  far  as 
I  knew,  neither  Australia  nor  Canada  would  tolerate  the  infliction  of 
this  punishment  on  their  soldiers,  and  urging  that  the  New  Zealand 
Government  should  make  the  strongest  representations  to  the  Im- 
perial military  authorities  to  the  same  effect.  In  this  letter  I  also 
urged,  on  behalf  of  the  deputation:  — 

1.  That  an  open  and  full  enquiry  be  held  concerning  the  treatment 
of  the  Conscientious  Objectors — both  in  New  Zealand  and  in  England 
and  France. 

2.  That  the  fourteen  deported  men  be  returned  to  New  Zealand 
for  the  purpose  of  this  enquiry,  as  well  as  a  matter  of  correct  policy. 

3.  That  the  men  who  are  alleged  to  have  suffered  the  persecution 
described  have  the  right  to  be  represented  by  counsel,  and  that  no 
restriction  be  placed  on  them  in  the  matter  of  calling  witnesses  from 
among  the  military  prisoners  and  guards. 

4.  That  the  military  officers  implicated  in  the  alleged  illegal  treat- 
ment of  Conscientious  Objectors  be  relieved  of  their  duties  pending  the 
investigation  of  their  conduct,  and,  if  found  guilty,  discharged  from 
the  service  and  called  upon  to  answer  charges  in  the  civil  courts. 

5.  That  Wanganui  Prison  be  transferred  from  military  to  civil 
control. 

I  concluded  with  the  intimation  that  I  was  taking  the  liberty  of 
handing  the  whole  of  the  correspondence  to  the  press  early  the  follow- 
ing week,  and  that  I  took  it  as  a  matter  of  course  that  Sir  Jame? 
would  have  no  objection   to  this  being  done. 

I  departed  for  Auckland  on  June  22  as  I  had  arranged  to  do,  leav- 
ing the  copies  of  the  foregoing  letters  for  insertion  in  the  following 
week's  "Worker."  I  addressed  a  huge  meeting  on  the  subject  of  the 
C.O.'s  in  the  Lyric  Theatre,  Auckland,  on  Sunday  evening,  at  which 
meeting  a  motion  was  unanimously  carried  protesting  against  the 
^Magisterial  Inquiry  being  held  in  camera,  and  on  Monday,  June  24, 
left  for  Rotorua,  visiting  Mr.  P.  C.  "Webb  at  Kaingaroa  on  Tuesday. 
June  25.  Returning  from  Rotorua  I  found  that  the  papers  of  Thurs- 
day had  reprinted  from  the  "Worker"  the  substance  of  my  statements 
to  the  Minister — and  the  whole  of  New  Zealand  was  at  last  in  posses- 
sion of  the  major  facts  concerning  happenings  most  people  never 
dreamed  could  take  place  in  this  country. 

After  journeying  to  Masterton  and  Napier,  where  I  spoke  for  the 
local  Labour  Party  branches,  I  returned  to  Wellington,  and  found  a 
letter  awaiting  me  from  Sir  James  Allen,  dated  June  24,  asking  for 
the  names  of  prisoners  and  officers  referred  to  in  my  letter  of  June 
21.  and  also  asking  what  I  meant  by  "crucifixion"  when  I  referred  to 
Field   Punishment   No.   1.      The  .Minister's   letter  concluded:  — 

"I  am  havini:  inquiry  made  about  Archibald  Baxter  by  telegram. 
In  reply  to  the  specific  points  mentioned  by  you,  I  have  to  say  that 

131 


ARMAGEDDON   OR   CALVARY. 

full  inquiry  will  be  held  concerning  the  treatment  of  Conscientious 
Objectors  in  New  Zealand,  and  further  inquiry  will  be  made  in  Eng- 
land and  France.  I  regret  that  I  cannot  promise  to  bring  back  the 
fourteen  deported  men.  I  can  see  no  good  reason  for  the  men  being 
represented  by  counsel,  but  am  having  further  inquiry  made  on  this 
question.  No  restriction  will  be  placed  upon  the  men  calling  wit- 
nesses from  among  the  military  prisoners  and  guards.  If  any  mili- 
tary men  are  implicated  they  will  be  dealt  with.  The  Wanganui 
Detention  Barracks  were  established  in  order  that  the  men  might  be 
saved  from  any  possible  stigma  that  might  be  attached  to  being 
in  civil  prisons.  If  reform  is  necessary  at  Wanganui  Detention  Bar- 
racks reform  will  be  instituted." 

Referring  to  my  proposal  to  give  the  correspondence  to  the  press, 
the  Minister  gave  it  as  his  opinion  that  it  would  be  wiser  to  wait 
until  the  inquiry  was  concluded,  when,  he  said,  the  public  would  be 
able  to  judge  with  the  real  facts  before  them. 

To  Sir  James's  request  for  names,  etc.,  I  replied,  in  effect,  that  we 
should  be  ready  to  furnish  these  when  an  open  inquiry  was  held. 

In  due  time  I  received  a  letter  from  Colonel  Tate,  Adjutant-General, 
dated  27th  June,  and  setting  forth: — "The  matter  of  counsel  appearing 
at  the  inquiry  into  the  allegations  of  cruelty  at  the  Wanganui  Deten- 
tion Barracks  has  been  submitted  to  Mr.  Hewitt,  Stipendiary  Magis- 
trate, who  is  conducting  the  inquiry,  and  I  am  directed  by  the  Hon. 
the  Minister  of  Defence  to  inform  you  that  Mr.  Hewitt  has  replied  to 
the  effect  that,  at  present,  he  does  not  propose  to  permit  representa- 
tions by  counsel,  but  should  he  at  a  later  stage  consider  such  repre- 
sentations necessary,  and  likely  to  be  useful  to  him,  he  will  so  inti- 
mate." 

Public  meetings  and  the  ordinary  meetings  of  Trade  Unions  and 
political  Labour  bodies  carried  resolutions  protesting  against  a  secret 
inquiry.  A  meeting  of  the  Second  Division  League  demanded  a  public 
investigation,  and  some  of  the  newspapers  backed  up  the  demand. 

The  inquiry  was  duly  conducted  by  Mr.  Hewitt,  but,  in  the  mean- 
time, the  prisoners  had  been  scattered  to  different  prisons,  and  some 
of  the  officials  had  likewise  been  either  given  "leave  of  absence  with- 
out pay"  or  transferred.  It  is  said,  with  how  much  truth  I  do  not 
know,  that  this  policy  had  been  adopted  to  prevent  statements 
being  "concocted"  in  connection  with  the  inquiry.  In  addition,  a 
number  of  the  witnesses  had  been  forcibly  embarked — "shanghaied' 
was  the  term  the  prisoners  themselves'  used  to  describe  the  process. 
These  were  men  who  had  gone  into  camp  and  donned  the  uniform, 
afterwards  deserting  and  when  arrested  refusing  to  undertake  ser- 
vice. Their  position  was,  of  course,  greatly  different  from  that  of  the 
C.O.'s.  The  scattering  of  the  men  meant  that  the  Magistrate  had  to 
move  from  place  to  place  to  see  his  witnesses.  My  information 
(from  the  men  interviewed)  is  generally  that  the  Magistrate  conducted 

]32 


WANGANUI  REVELATIONS. 

his  investigations  very  fairly;  that  he  was  inclined  to  be  "over  firm," 
but  resorted  to  none  of  the  bullying  tactics  which  so  often  make  of 
court  cases  a  burlesque.  He  neglected  no  opportunity  of  getting  the 
fullest  possible  statement  from  the  men  concerned,  but  did  not  attempt 
to  confuse  any  man  in  the  making  of  his  statement,  although  he 
exhausted  every  fair  means  to  test  the  accuracy  of  any  statement  of 
which  he  was  doubtful. 

As  will  be  seen,  the  Magistrate  received  his  instructions 
on  June  20.  I  have  not  been  able  to  ascertain  the  date  on 
which  he  commenced  his  investigations;  but  it  would,  of  course,  be 
soon  after  receiving  his  instructions.  From  the  time  the  in?tructions 
were  issued  to  the  Magistrate  to  the  .date  on  which  his  report  was 
signed  and  ready  for  presentation  to  the  Minister,  was  exactly  three 
months,  a  lapse  of  time  which  indicates  the  amount  of  care  which  must 
have  been  devoted  to  both  investigation  and  report.  But,  although  the 
Report  was  available,  as  the  date  shows,  on  September  21,  1918,  it 
was  not  made  public  until  December  5 — two  and  a  half  months  later, 
when  it  was  laid  on  the  table  of  the  House  as  a  result  of  a  repeated 
effort  on  my  part. 

On  October  23  I  asked  the  Minister  of  Defence,  without  notice, 
•"whether  the  report  of  the  Magistrate's  Court  in  connection  with  the 
alleged  cruelties  practised  upon  Conscientious  Objectors  at  the  Wan- 
ganui  Detention  Barracks  had  yet  been  presented,  and,  if  so,  whether 
the  Report  would  be  laid  on  the  table  of  the  House."  Sir  James 
Allen  replied  that  "the  report  had  not  yet  been  before  Cabinet.  As 
soon  as  it  had  been  considered  by  Cabinet  it  would  be  presented  to 
the  House." 

About  the  middle  of  November  I  fell  a  victim  to  the  influenza  epi- 
demic, then  raging,  and  was  away  from  the  House  for  some  time.  On 
December  2,  however,  I  left  my  bed  and  (unwisely  enough)  was  in 
my  place  in  the  House  for  a  couple  of  hours.  During  the  afternoon 
I  asked  the  Minister,  again  without  notice,  whether  the  Magisterial 
Report  in  connection  with  the  allegations  of  cruelty  inflicted  on  mili- 
tary prisoners  in  Wanganui  was  yet  available;  if  not,  when  would 
the  House  be  given  an  opportunity  of  dealing  with  it?  Sir  James 
Allen  this  time  replied  that  "the  report  was  at  Defence  headquarters, 
and  he  was  sorry  to  say  it  had  not  come  back  to  him.  He  would 
make  inquiry  about  it,  and  get  it  brought  down  as  soon  as  he  could." 

I  was  very  ill  at  the  time,  and  found  it  impossible  to  remain  for  the 
whole  of  the  sitting.  I  suffered  a  slight  relapse  as  a  result  of  my 
going  out  too  soon,  and  was  compelled  to  lay  up  again,  remaining  In 
bed  until  the  following  Friday,  when  I  again  ventured  out — this  time 
to  make  a  fight,  along  with  Mr.  Peter  Fraser,  M.P.,  against  the  Bill 
designed  to  disfranchise  the  C.O.'s. 

On  December  5,  while  I  was  away,  the  Magisterial  Report  was  laid 
on  the  table  of  the  House,  and  I  was,  therefore,  deprived  of  the 
opportunity  of   di.scussing   it  on   that  occasion.       However,   when  the 

i:53 


ARMAGEDDON   OR   CALVARY. 

report  was  tabled,  it  almost  completely  substantiated  the  statements 
of  the  C.O.'s,  and  vindicated  as  well  the  attitude  which  had  been  taken 
up  by  those  of  us  who  sought  to  deputatlonise  the  Minister  in  the 
first  place.  It  was,  needless  to  say,  a  source  of  discomfiture  for  the 
Government.  I  have  deemed  it  advisable  to  reproduce  the  report  in  its 
entirety  in  the  chapter  which  follows. 


XXV.— THE   MAGISTERIAL   REPORT. 

Marton,  21st  September,  1918.  • 
To  the  Hon.  Sir  James  Allen,  K.C.B.G., 

Acting-Prime  Minister  and  Minister  of  Defence  for  the  Dominion 
of  New  Zealand. 
Sir,— 

[Re  alleged  ill-treatment  of  prisoners  in  the  "Wanganui  Detention 

Barracks.] 

In  accordance  with  the  request  contained  in  a  letter  dated  20th 
June  last  from  Major-General  Sir  Alfred  Robin,  K.C.M.G.,  that  I  should 
enquire  into  and  report  upon  the  above  matter,  I  have  the  honour  to 
report  as  follows: 

With  the  object  of  having  the  scope  of  the  enquiry  clearly  defined  I 
interviewed  the  Adjutant-General — Colonel  Tate — and  the  Director  of 
Personal  Services — Major  Osburne-Lilly — in  Wellington. 

My  attention  was  directed  to  a  proof  letter  addressed  to  the  Editor 
of  the  "Truth"  newspaper  from  a  number  of  military  prisoners  who 
had  been  confined  in  the  Wanganui  Detention  Barracks,  complaining 
of  ill-treatment  at  the  hands  of  the  officer  in  charge,  Lieutenant  Cramp- 
ton,  and  others  of  the  staff,  and  it  was  suggested  that  I  should  take 
that  letter  as  the  basis  of  my  enquiry,  and  investigate  the  charges 
there  made  and  any  cases  of  similar  nature  which  might,  during  the 
course  of  the  proceedings,  come  under  my  notice. 

I  was  informed  that  I  should  have  an  entirely  free  hand,  and 
that  it  was  desired  that  the  charges  should  bo  thoroughly  investi- 
gated. 

Particularly  I  was  asked  to  ascertain:  —  (a)  To  what  degree,  if  at 
all,  the  allegations  in  the  letter  to  the  Editor  of  "Truth"  were  correct, 
(b)  If  force  had  been  used,  for  what  purpose  it  had  been  used.  (c) 
Whether  it  was  lawful  to  use  force  for  such  purpose;  and,  further, 
I  was  asked  to  make  such  recommendations  as  I  might  think  proper 
concerning  the  future   conduct  of  the   institution. 

Instructions  were  given  to  Camp  Commandants  and  other  officers 
to  allow  me  access  to  all  camps  and  military  institutions,  and  to  per- 
mit me  to  see  any  soldier  or  other  person  whom  I  might  desire  to 
see;   and  throughout  the  enquiry  every  facility  has  been  afforded  me 

134 


TllK  MACilSTEKIAL  RKiH)KT. 

by  the  Department  to  ensure  a  fair  and  coraplete  investigation  on  the 
matters  in  question. 

I  have  seen  all  the  prisoners  whose  names  are  appended  to  the 
"Truth"  letter,  with  the  exception  of  three,  who  are  now  on  active 
service,  and  one— Fitzpatrick — who  has  escaped  from  custody,  as  well 
as  every  person  whom  any  prisoner  has  desired  me  to  see  as  being 
able  to  throw  any  light  on  the  subject. 

Having  regard  to  the  general  nature  of  the  enquiry,  I  decided  to 
commence  my  interviewing  the  prisoners  in  order  to  get  a  general 
idea  of  the  situation,  and,  having  ascertained  that,  to  be  guided  by 
■what  I  should  learn  as  to  how  I  should  proceed  further.  I  came  to 
the  conclusion  that  I  could  best  effect  this  object  by  seeing  them  In 
private  wherever  they  might  be,  and  going  into  the  matter  with  them 
man  to  man,  and  I  have  continued  this  method  with  all  concerned 
throughout  the  enquiry. 

Shortly  after  deciding  upon  this  method  of  enquiry,  and  while  ia 
Christchurch,  I  received  a  telegraphic  communication  from  Mr.  J. 
McCombs,  M.P.,  asking  that  I  should  allow  the  prisoners  to  be  repre- 
sented by  counsel,  but,  having  decided  upon  the  course  that  I  intended 
to  pursue,  and,  as  the  enquiry  was  a  Departmental  one  in  which  I 
had  no  power  to  take  evidence  on  oath,  it  did  not  appear  to  me  that 
to  do  so  would  be  either  convenient  or  helpful,  and  I  advised  Mr.  :\Ic- 
C-onibs  to  that  effect. 

I  then  proceeded  with  the  enquiry,  and  have  seen  and  examined, 
and,  in  the  majority  of  cases,  have  obtained  written  statements  from 
prisoners,  warders  and  others  at  the  Paparoa  Prison,  Christchurch, 
the  Alexandra  Detention  Barracks  and  elsewhere  in  Wellington,  the 
Trentham  Training   Camp,   and   in    Wanganui. 

Having  regard  to  the  subject  of  the  enquiry,  I  knew  that  I  might 
expect  to  meet  exaggeration  on  the  one  hand  and  prevarication  on  the 
other,  and  I  approached  it  with  this  mind,  checking  the  statements  of 
one  against  that  of  another,  and  examining  each  person  with  reference 
to  the  statements  of  others.  I  have  been  able  to  discover  little  or 
no  exaggeration  in  the  statements  of  the  prisoners.  So  far  as  I  have 
been  able  to  check  them  they  are  fair  and  truthful.  There  are,  of 
course,  discrepancies,  but  I  found  none  that  I  can  with  certainty  put 
down  to  dishonest  motives;  on  the  other  hand,  I  am  satisfied  that 
many  of  the  statements  made  to  me  by  nieinbers  of  the  Barracks  staff 
were  untrue. 

I  do  not  intend  to  set  out  in  detail  the  evidence  in  support  of  any 
of  my  conclusions  or  the  .steps  by  which  I  arrive  at  them,  except  where 
it  may  be  necessary  to  do  so  for  the  purpose  of  explaining  or  illus- 
trating any  particular  matter.  To  do  so  would  be  to  lengthen  this 
report  beyond  reasonable  limit.  I  attach  hereto  the  evidence,  which 
speaks  for  itself.  1  have  omitted  altogether  reference  to  any  matter 
that  I  regard  as  of  only  minor  importance,  or  that  I  do  not  find  to  be 
substantiated. 

135 


ARMAGEDDON   OR   CALVARY. 

I  first  deal  with  the  "Truth"  letter. 

This  letter,  though  purporting  to  be  signed  by  nine  prisoners,  was, 
in  fact,  not  so  signed;  it  was  written  either  by  or  upon  information 
supplied  by  Harry  Wilson,  he  being  one  of  the  first  of  the  prisoners 
to  leave  the  Detention  Barracks  after  the  methods  complained  of  in 
the  letter  began  to  be  put  into  operation.  As  his  sentence  was  ex- 
piring, it  was  arranged  between  the  prisoners  that  he  should  take 
steps  to  give  publicity  to  what  was  going  on,  and  the  letter  was  the 
result  of  this  arrangement. 

In  the  main  the  statements  contained  in  the  letter  are  true,  and  I 
obtained  evidence  of  several  other  things  that  are  not  referred  to  in 
it.  As  the  letter  was  written  before  Donovan  underwent  his  punish- 
ment there  is  no  reference  to  his  case,  nor  to  the  cases  of  Fitzpatrick 
or  McConville.  There  is,  however,  about  the  letter  an  exaggeration 
of  style  that  tends  to  give  a  heightened  impression  as  to  some  of  the 
incidents  narrated.  Take,  for  instance,  that  part  of  the  letter  which 
deals  with  Beaton: 

"The  following  day  another  objector  arrived  from  Wellington,  in 
charge  of  Sergt.  Smith,  of  the  Red  Caps,  the  late  coal  dealer  of 
Petone,  Lieutenant  Crampton's  right-hand  man.  On  refusing  to  do 
certain  things  against  his  principles  he  was  forcibly  dressed  in 
denims,  handcuffed,  and  then  dragged  rdund  the  yard  by  means  of 
pull-through  ropes  around  his  neck,  which  nearly  choked  him.  He 
was  kicked  and  punched  at  the  same  time,  and  also  pushed  against 
the  wall  with  sickening  thuds,  until  his  face  on  both  sides  was  Jike  a 
piece  of  raw  steak,  and  drops  of  blood  were  to  be  seen  all  round  the 
yard  and  also  on  the  walls." 

This  suggests  that  Beaton  was  seriously  wounded,  or  injured  about 
the  face,  as  a  result  of  the  treatment.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  he  was 
seen  by  Dr.  Anderson  on  the  evening  of  the  day  on  which  he  received 
his  punishment.  The  doctor  says  there  were  several  scratches  on 
the  side  of  his  face,  none  of  a  serious  nature,  but  such  as  could— and 
I  am  satisfied  did — bleed  profusely.  The  statement  in  the  letter  as  to 
the  appearance  due  to  profuse  bleeding  may  in  a  way  be  correct,  but 
without  the  explanation  furnished  by  the  doctor's  statement,  it  con- 
veys much  more  than  the  truth.  Later  on  I  have  set  out  in  Beaton's 
own  words  his  account  of  the  affair. 

It  may  be  well  to  state  here  that,  although  none  of  the  men  were 
seriously  injured,  it  is  possible,  for  one  who  knows  how,  to  inflict 
severe  punishment  without  leaving  many  marks,  and  that  is,  I  think, 
what  happened  in  these  cases. 

Moynihan  and  Donovan — -especially  Donovan — are  spoken  of  as 
determined  Irishmen  who  had  set  themselves  to  defy  the  authorities 
by  refusing  to  wear  the  uniform  or  to  drill.  These  men  were  ordered 
two  hours'  pack  drill.  Neither  of  them  stood  it  a  full  hour.  Donovan 
Is  said  to  have  been  a  man  who,  in  resisting  capture,  had  fought  with 
two  policemen,  and  Moynihan  is  described  as  something  of  a  pugilist. 

1S6 


THE  .ma(;isti<:hial  rvahjrt. 

I  am  satisfied  that  it  would  take  something  more  than  moral  suasion 
to  reduce  .Moynihan  to  subjection  if  he  had  made  up  his  mind  to 
resist.  Yet  he  and  Donovan,  in  less  than  an  hour,  were  transformed 
from  determined  and  defiant  objectors  to  obedient  and  well-conducted 
prisoners. 

The  amount  of  force  used  in  each  case  would,  of  course,  depend, 
to  a  great  extent,  on  the  opposition  shown. 

Pallesen's  case  is  one  of  opposite  type  from  Moynihan's.  Palksen 
was  a  religious  objector — I  am  satisfied  a  genuine  one — who,  terrified 
by  threats  and  what  he  had  heard  from  other  prisoners  as  to  the 
treatment  meted  out  to  objectors,  decided  while  he  was  in  Barracks, 
to  offer  no  opposition  to  anything  he  was  asked  to  do. 

Each  newcomer  as  he  came  in  was  warned  by  the  other  prisoners 
of  what  he  might  expect  if  he  showed  any  opposition  to  wearing  the 
uniform  or  drilling.  Guard  Byrne  says  he  heard  Monyihan  saying  to 
another  prisoner:  "It's  not  a  bit  of  good  for  a  man  coming  into  the 
Barracks  and  saying  he  won't  carry  out  the  rules.  I  know  it.  They 
made  me  do  it,  and  if  they  can  make  me  do  it  they  can  make  anyone 
do  it."  Byrne  then  adds:  "What  Moynihan  said  was  perfectly  true: 
when  we  made  up  our  minds  that  we  must  do  it  we  made  them  do 
it.  If  they  had  done  it  in  the  beginning  there  would  have  been  no 
trouble."  Byrne  warned  Donovan  of  what  he  had  to  expect  and  ad- 
vised him  to  submit,  giving  me  as  his  reason,  "That  he  had  had 
enough  of  it  with  Moynihan.  Moynihan  was  a  marvel  of  man  to  stand 
what  he  did." 

Each  prisoner  who  objected  was  plainly  told  by  Lieut.  Crampton 
that  he  intended  to  have  discipline  and  obedience,  and  that  so  long 
as  a  prisoner  was  in  the  Barracks  he  would  have  to  comply  with  the 
regulations,  and  that  included  wearing  the  uniform  and  drilling  when 
required.  If  the  prisoner  would  not  agree  to  this  he  was  threatened 
with  the  consequence  of  refusal,  and  if  he  still  persisted  he  was 
broken  in  by  main  force.  In  Wilson's  and  Moynihan's  cases  bread  and 
water  and  solitary  confinement  were  tried  first.  Generally  speaking, 
"breaking  in"  was  accomplished  in  this  way:  A  weighted  pack  was 
put  on  the  prisoner's  back,  and  a  rifle  fastened  to  his  side  by  means 
of  handcuffs  and  a  piece  of  cord,  one  handcuff  being  attached  to  the 
stock  of  the  rifle  and  the  other  to  the  prisoner's  wrist;  the  barrel  was 
tied  by  the  cord  to  his  shoulder.  If  he  was  wearing  uniform,  instead 
of  being  tied  to  the  shoulder,  tiie  barrel  was  passed  through  the 
shoulder-strap.  The  prisoner  was  then  ordered  to  march,  and  if  he 
did  not  march  he  was  pushed  from  behind  and  helped  along  by  the 
arms  round  the  yard.  When  he  came  to  a  corner  he  was  pushed 
so  as  to  bump  against  the  wall,  often  so  that  he  would  strike  it  with 
his  head;  at  times  he  was  punched  and  thumped  on  the  back  and 
on  the  neck  and  his  heels  were  trodden  on.  In  some  cases  he  was 
kicked.  In  Donovan's  case,  which  I  consider  the  worst,  a  rope  was 
used   by  which  to  pull   him  aroimd,  water   was  thrown  on  him  while 

137 


ARMAGEDDON   OR   CALVARY. 

on  the  ground,  and  he  was  dragged  for  some  distance  along  the  floor 
of  the  yard.  Beaton  was  also  pulled  round  the  yard  by  means  of  a 
cerd,  and  he,  Moynihan  and  Donovan  were  caught  and  pulled  by  the 
hair.  From  time  to  time  the  men  would  be  stopped  and  asked  if  they 
would  wear  the  uniform  and  do  rifle  drill,  and  if  they  refused  or 
would  not  reply  they  were  driven  round  the  yard  again  until  they  were 
worn  out  and  exhausted  and  gave  in. 

In  all,  leaving  out  Fitzgerald's  case,  which  I  have  been  unable  to 
investigate  fully,  there  were  four  cases  in  which  prisoners  were  ac- 
tually broken  into  submission.  They  were  Wilson,  Moynihan,  Beaton 
and  Donovan.  The  details  of  each  of  these  cases  appear  in  the  state- 
ments of  the  prisoners  concerned. 

I  propose  to  use  Beaton's  own  words  as  giving  a  fair  average  of 
what  happened.  He  was  more  severely  treated  than  Wilson,  but  less 
so  than  Moynihan  or  Donovan.  His  statement  of  what  occurred  is 
accepted  by  Lieutenant  Crampton  as  being  a  "fair  outline  of  his 
career."  He  denies  only  that  he  ordered  anyone  to  pull  Beaton's  hair, 
and  says  he  could  not  tell  who  actually  tied  the  rope  on.  I  am  satisfied 
however,  that  Beaton'^  hair  was  pulled,  and  that  a  rope  was  tied 
round  his  neck  as  he  describes.     He  says: 

"I  am  a  coBscientious  objector.  I  arrived  in  the  Wanganui 
Barracks  on  the  6th  May  on  a  sentence  of  28  days  for  being  ab.s€nt 
without  leave  (not  rolling  up  to  medical  examination).  Sergt.  Smith 
took  me  up  from  Wellington.  On  arrival  at  the  Barracks  I  was  taken 
before  the  O.C.  to  have  my  particulars  taken.  When  it  came  to  the 
question  of  what  my  religion  was,  I  answered,  'I  decline  to  state." 
He  then  asked  me  my  next-of-kin.  I  said  I  hadn't  thought  of  it  before, 
and  it  would  take  me  a  little  time  to  consider.  After  taking  tthe 
other  particulars,  he  charged  me  witii  insolence.  He  asked  me  how 
I  pleaded,  and  I  said  'Not  Guilty.'  Sergt.  Smith  was  there  all  the 
time.  He  then  sentenced  me  io  two  hours'  pack  drill,  and  ordered  me 
to  be  deprived  of  my  mattrass  for  two  nights.  I  was  taken  to  a  cell, 
and  told  to  take  off  my  civil  clothes  by  Sergt.  Smith.  I  refused  to 
take  them  off,  and  Sergt.  Smith  said,  'You  are  very  foolish."  Parmenter 
came  in,  and  he  and  Sergt.  Smith  took  off  m.v  clothes,  I  not  resisting. 
The  O.C.  came  in  also.  They  put  me  into  the  denims.  I  was  not 
treated  roughly.  I  was  then  taken  into  the  office,  I  think,  and  a  pack 
was  put  on.  From  there  I  was  taken  into  the  yard  and  a  rifle  was 
offered  to  me,  which  I  declined  to  take.  So  it  was  handcuffed  to  my 
wrist — a  pair  of  ordinary  handcuffs,  I  think.  Then  I  was  ordered  to 
march;  I  think  there  was  only  Parmenter,  Smith,  and  the  O.C.  there 
then.  I  just  stood  still.  Smith  then  tried  to  force  mo  to  march  by 
pushing  me  behind.  He  pushed  me  a  step  or  two.  As  I  did  not  take 
it  on  the  O.C.  went  in  and  came  out  with  a  rope.  He  fastened  it  roun  J 
my  neck.  Then  Smith  took  hold  of  it  and  commenced  to  pull  me 
alon.sj,  Parmenter  pushing  behind.  I  was  pushed  and  pulled  this  way 
for  several   minutes.     Every  time  I   came  to  a  corner,  especially  the 

138 


THE  MAGISTKllIAL  REPORT. 

corner  near  cell  3,  I  was  bumped  into  it.  The  O.C.  then  ordered 
Smith  to  catch  me  by  the  hair.  'Get  him  by  the  hair,"  or  something 
like  that.  Smith  grabbed  me  by  the  hair  and  kept  hold  of  it  until  a 
handful  came  out.  Then  he  got  hold  again,  and  some  more  came 
owt.  Then  he  left  the  hair  alone  and  went  on  pulling  the  rope.  AVhen 
he  had  me  by  the  hair  he  had  a  short  grip  of  the  rope.  Hayes  and 
Byrne  then  came  on  the  scene.  Byrne  commenced  to  punch  me  on  the 
back  of  the  head  and  neck.  This  was  kept  up  for  several  minutes. 
They  were  still  running  me  around.  Sometimes  I  fell  to  the  ground. 
I  was  not  kicked  while  on  the  ground,  but  I  was  kicked  on  the  heels 
to  quicken  my  pace.  When  I  was  on  the  ground  the  O.C.  looked  at 
his  watch  and  said  he  was  taking  that  time  off.  Occasionally  I  was 
stopped  to  right  the  pack,  but  I  was  kept  going  continuously.  Smitli 
was  not  on  the  rope  all  the  time;  sometimes  someone  else  would  take 
his  place.  Hayes  was  the  one  that  did  the  kicking  on  the  heels. 
It  was  not  a  serious  affair — it  was  only  to  quicken  the  pace.  After  a 
time  I  took  hold  of  the  rifle  and  held  it  up.  I  found  it  better  for 
myself  to  do  that  than  let  it  hang  by  the  handcuff.  The  O.C,  after  a 
while,  asked  me  if  I  would  put  on  the  uniform.  I  said  'No,'  and  he 
said,  'Keep  him  going.'  After  a  while  he  repeated  the  question  and  I 
answered,  'No,'  and  he  said,  'At  him  again,'  until  I  was  bleeding  from 
the  face,  where  I  had  been  pushed  against  the  wall.  (I  could  not  lie 
on  my  right  side  for  three  weeks  after.)  They  kept  me  going  until  I 
was  fair  done  up.  At  the  latter  part  the  rope  was  choking  me.  After 
about  three-quarters  of  an  hour,  I  think,  I  was  taken  outside  the 
front  of  the  building  to  finish  my  hour.  I  think  he  thought  he  had 
dealt  enough  with  me.  From  the  time  I  took  hold  of  the  rifle  I 
walked  myself.  The  second  hour  I  did  the  next  day  on  a  sentry  beat. 
— I  had  given  in  to  drilling.  After  I  had  done  the  first  hour  I  was 
ordered  and  took  a  cold  bath.  I  consider  the  treatment  I  got  in  the 
yard  brutal.  It  is  hard  to  explain  it  on  paper — it  doesn't  look  any- 
thing, but  for  an  untrained  man  to  go  through  it  was  very  bard.  He 
is  more  than  a  beaten  man  after  a  quarter  of  an  hour.  xVfter  1  did 
what    I    was    told    there   was    no    further   trouble." 

In  addition  to  the  four  ca-ses  I  have  spoken  of,  1  find  the  followin?^ 
matters  proved:- 

1.  That  on  the  occasion  on  which  Wilson  was  forcibly  dressed  in 
his  cell  he  was  handcuffed,  and  while  so  handcuffed  was  knocked 
against  the  wall  of  his  cell  by  Corporal  I'arnienier,  so  as  to  strike  the 
wall   with  his  liead. 

1'.  That  Moynihan  was  forcibly  (iress(  d  on  three  occasions  on  the 
Sunday  on  which  lie  was  dealt  with  in  the  yard— he  having  between 
time  torn  off  the  uniform  or  part  of  it.  That  these  dre.'isings  resulted 
in  a  general  nielei'  or,  as  one  of  the  .guards  describes  it,  "mix-up." 
That  while  these  things  were  going  on  Moynihan  no  doubt  received 
some  knocks;  that  he  had  his  head  knelt  on  by  one  of  the  guards, 
and  that  he  received  a  kick  on  the  chest.     I  am  of  the  opinion  that 

KIM 


ARMAGEDDON   OR  CALVARY. 

the  kick  or  knock  was  one  of  the  general  results  of  the  scuffle,  and 
was  not  intentional. 

3.  That  Badger  and  Pallesen  were  dressed  in  uniform  against  their 
wills,  but  that,  as  they  offered  no  resistance,  they  received  no  rough 
treatment. 

4.  That  Badger  had  a  rifle  handcuffed  to  his  wrist  and  that  he  was 
kicked  and  punched  by  Sergt.  Smith  while  being  drilled  in  the  staff 
yard  as  described  in  his  statement. 

5.  That  on  the  occasion  spoken  of  in  prisoner  Cariah's  statement, 
and  in  the  circumstances  and  in  the  manner  described  therein  he  was 
kicked  by  Guard  Williams. 

6.  That  Fitzpatrick  was  ill-treated  in  the  yard  by  Lieut.  Crampton 
and  Sergt.  Smith.  I  am  unable — owing  to  Fitzpatrick  not  being  avail- 
able— to  ascertain  the  full  detail  of  the  ill-treatment,  and  I  am  satis- 
fied that  as  a  result  of  what  happened  in  the  yard  Fitzpatrick  was 
bruised  on  the  arm  and  was  bleeding  from  the  ear. 

7.  That  the  prisoners  Badger  and  Pallesen  were  spoken  to  by  Lieut. 
Crampton  on  the  occasion  of  his  taking  their  particulars  in  the  office, 
and  by  others  of  the  staff  on  other  occasions,  in  the  manner  described 
in  their  statements,  and  that  this  treatment  was  in  some  way  as  hurt- 
ful to  them  as  was  physical  ill-treatment  to  the  other  prisoners. 

8.  That  McConville  was  assaulted  by  Lieut.  Crampton  in  the  yard 
while  undergoing  punishment  drill.  In  the  absence  of  Fitzpatrick, 
who  was  present  at  the  time,  I  was  unable  to  make  a  complete  inves- 
tigation of  this  case.  Owing  to  my  not  being  able  to  get  Fitzpatrick's 
statement,  and  having  regard  to  the  denial  of  Lieut.  Crampton  and 
the  statement  of  Hayes,  I  am  unable  to  say  whether  McConville  was 
actually  struck  by  the  rifle;  but  I  am  satisfied  that  Lieut  Crampton 
caught  McConville  by  the  throat,  pushed  his  head  against  the  wall, 
and  at  least  threatened  to  strike  him,  and  that  the  object  of  this 
assault  was  to  frighten  McConville  into  taking  the  uniform  kit  when 
it  should  be  offered  to  him  on  his  arrival  at  Trentham,  and  was  not 
done  for  anything  McConville  was  doing  or  had  done  or  omitted  to  do 
in  the  yard. 

From  all  the  happenings  it  was  quite  clear  that  the  object  of  the 
application  of  force  was  to  compel  prisoners  who  objected  to  do  so 
to  take  the  uniform  and  to  do  the  rifle  drill  with  the  general  purpose 
of  breaking  down   opposition   to  Military   Service. 

As  to  whether  it  was  lawful  to  adopt  means  of  this  kind  to  effect 
this  object,  it  is  scarcely  necessary  for  me  to  say  anything.  If 
measures  of  this  kind  had  been  used  in  a  Civil  Prison  to  compel  a 
prisoner  to  perform  some  task  there  is  no  doubt  as  to  what  would 
have  been  said  to  them.  Turning  to  the  rules  for  the  conduct  of 
Military  Detention  Barracks,  I  find  that  the  only  regulation  dealing 
directly  with  the  subject  is  Regulation  10!),  which  says:  "\o  member 
of  the  staff  shall  strike  a  soldier  under  sentence  unless  compelled  to  do 
so  in  self-defence,  and  in  any  case  in  which  the  application  of  force 

140 


THE  MAGISTERIAL  REPORT. 

to  a  soldier  is  needed  no  more  force  than  is  necessary  shall  be  used. ' 
This  regulation  is  practically  identical  in  terms  with  Regulation  31 
of  the  Regulations  under  "The  Prisons  Act,  1908,"  being  the  rules 
regulating  the  conduct  of  civil  prisons. 

It  appears  to  me  that  under  this  regulation  no  more  force  may  be 
used  either  in  a  civil  prison  or  in  a  military  detention  barracks  (as 
at  present  constituted)  than  is  necessary  to  prevent  a  prisoner  from 
harming  himself,  his  fellow-prisoners,  the  prison  staff  or  the  prison 
property,  or  to  convey  him  to  or  from  some  place  to  or  from  which 
he  has  been  lawfully  ordered  to  go,  and  it  cannot  be  used  to  compel  a 
prisoner  serving  sentence  to  perform  some  task  or  to  do  anything  in 
the  nature  of  a  task  that  he  has  refused  to  do. 

It  was  contended  by  Lieut  Crampton  that,  according  to  the  custom 
of  the  service,  force  similar  in  kind  to  that  used  by  him  was  applied 
in  all  detention  barracks,  and  evidence  was  adduced  to  nie  as  to  the 
practise  in  the  Abbassia  and  Citadel  Detention  Barracks  at  Cairo  and 
in  some  punishment  compounds  under  Imperial  rule  in  France.  From 
this  it  appears  that  force  more  or  less  severe  is  used  as  punishment 
and  to  reduce  refractory  prisoners  to  submission.  There  was,  how- 
ever, no  question  of  objection  to  military  service  with  any  of  these 
prisoners.  They  were  simply  cases  of  defaulters,  some  of  the  riff-raff 
of  the  Army.  Strong  measures  would  have  to  be  taken  in  such  cases. 
But  whether  force  of  the  kind  spoken  of  was  or  was  not  used  in  those 
places  is  beside  the  question.  Either  the  regulations  imder  which 
they  were  conducted  were  different  from  those  in  force  in  New  Zea- 
land, or  much  of  what  is  said  to  have  been  done  there  was  as  irre- 
gtilar  as  what  was  done  in  the  present  cases. 

I  am  satisfied  that  Lieut.  Crampton  knew  that  what  was  t)eing  done 
would  not,  if  called  into  question,  have  borne  the  light  of  day,  but  it 
is  fair  to  him  to  say  that  his  position  was  in  some  respects  a  difficult 
one.  If  he  had  only  had  the  ordinary  military  prisoner  to  deal  with 
I  do  not  think,  so  far  as  he  was  concerned,  that  there  would  have  been 
any  trouble  over  the  management  of  the  prison.  By  the  ordinary 
military  prisoner  I  mean  the  man  who,  having  no  objection  to  military 
service,  is  doing  a  term  of  imprisonment  for  "absence  from  parade," 
"drunkenness  on  dtity,"  oi-  some  such  offence,  and  who,  recognising 
himself  as  a  soldier,  is  quite  amonai)le  to  military  discipline  and 
looks  upon  his  drill  as  ])art  of  his  ordinary  work. 

But  side  l)y  side  with  this  class  of  men.  Lieut.  Crampton  had  to 
deal  with  two  other  classt  s  of  prisoners — one  composed  of  men  openly 
"up  against  and  out  to  heat"  military  service,  the  other  class  com- 
posed of  men  whose  reliaious  scruples-  though  in  many  cases  genuine 
— are  beyond  the  iindei-siaiuiiiii;  of  the  nornially-eonstituted  person. 
Neither  of  these  would  comply  with  the  regulations,  and  the  Lieutenant 
was  thus  faced  with  the  question  of  the  effect  or  the  example  of  these 
men  on  the  ordinary  prisoner.  Seeing  them  doiiic  as  they  liked — a 
favourite  practice  with  some  of  the  more  defiant  of  the  objectors  was 

141 


ARMAGEDDON   OR  CALVARY. 

to  show  their  defiance  by  refusing  to  address  the  officer  as  "Sir" — the 
ordinary  prisoner  would  naturally  see  no  reason  why  he  should  not 
behave  in  the  same  way. 

Lieut.  Crampton  says  that,  before  he  took  actual  charge  of  the 
Barracks  at  Wanganui,  knowing  that  he  would  have  Conscientious 
Objectors  to  deal  with,  he  had  visited  the  Alexandra  Barracks,  Wel- 
lington, for  the  purpose  of  seeing  in  practice  the  methods  applied  there. 
He  says  he  found  discipline  in  those  Barracks  very  bad,  that  Conscienti- 
ous Objectors  were  under  the  control  of  a  corporal  and  were  allowed 
to  do  what  they  liked.  He  says  that  in  answer  to  a  question,  the 
corporal  replied,  "What  can  I  do?  If  I  ask  them  to  do  something  or 
wear  any  prison  clothmg  they  refuse.  They  whistle,  sing,  call  out, 
and  count  out  the  military  police,  and  do  what  they  like." 

He  explained  that  in  consequence  of  what  he  saw  there  he  resolved 
to  have  a  different  state  of  things  in  the  Barracks  under  his  charge, 
and,  if  his  description  of  matters  at  the  Alexandra  Barracks  is  cor- 
rect, it  was  certainly  time  that  a  change  was  brought  about  there. 

The  defiant  objectors  gave  him  credit  for  being  quite  fair  with 
them.  He  was  determined  that  military  discipline  should  be  main- 
tained in  the  Barracks,  and  he  made  this  quite  plain  to  them.  As 
soon  as  one  of  them  had  given  in  and  agreed  to  "carry  on"  there  was 
nothing  to  complain  of  on  the  part  of  Lieut.  Crampton.  His  attitude 
towards  this  stamp  of  man  was:  "Either  I  beat  you  or  you  beat  me, 
and  I'll  take  care  you  don't  beat  me."  He  took  a  short  cut  towards 
solving  the  problem  before  him,  disregarding  the  fact  that  prison 
regulations  are  binding  on  all  alike,  and  that,  while  they  call  for 
strict  compliance  on  the  part  of  the  prisoners,  they  call  with  much 
greater  force  for  compliance  from  those  in  whose  charge  prisoners  are 
placed,  and  in  whose  hands  they  are  to  a  very  great  extent  helpless 
dependants. 

Under  the  regulations,  what  appears  to  me  to  be  ample  power  of 
punishment  is  given  to  officers  in  charge.  Under  Regulation  131  they 
may  order  close  confinement,  punishment  diet,  and  deprivation  of 
mattress  for  any  period  not  exceeding  three  days.  This  power  is  far 
greater  than  that  possessed  by  the  jailer  of  a  Civil  Prison,  and  a 
prisoner  committing  a  breach  of  regulations  lays  himself  open  to  be 
dealt  with  by  courtmartial,  which  may  impose  still  greater  punish- 
ment. Had  Lieut.  Crampton  dealt  with  these  prisoners  throughout  in 
accordance  with  this  regulation,  he  would  have  been  within  his  rights, 
but  it  is  very  open  to  question  whether,  as  a  matter  of  principle,  it 
is  right  to  deal  with  them  at  all  in  this  way.  It  has  to  be  remem- 
bered that  these  men  were  military  objectors;  that  for  refusing  their 
kit,  which  really  means  refusing  to  perform  any  military  duty,  they 
had  been  sentenced  to  detention;  to  again  offer  them  the  kit  or  part 
of  it  or  to  require  them  to  perform  acts  of  a  military  nature  while 
under  detention  and  to  further  punish  them  for  refusal  is  in  effect  to 
puni.sh  them  twice  for  the  same  offence.    If  the  courtmartial  had  power 

142 


THE  MAGISTERIAL  REPORT. 

to  order  "bread  and  water"  or  to  impose  other  conditions  as  part  t 
the  original  sentence  for  refusing  the  kit,  good  and  well;  it  could — 
if  it  wished — have  done  so.  But  if  such  a  court  had  not  that  power, 
or  if  it  had  refrained  from  exercising  it,  it  is  not  proper  for  the  pun- 
ishment awarded  by  the  courtmartial  for  a  particular  offence  to  be 
increased  by  other  means  because  of  a  repetition  of  that  offence  dur- 
ing the  period  covered  by  the  original  term. 

I  think  the  practice  of  sending  objectors  for  a  short  term  to  De- 
tention Barracks  is  absurd.  It  tends  to  destroy  the  discipline  of  the 
ordinary  military  offender  and  seems  to  me  to  serve  no  useful  pur- 
pose. I  think  such  men  should  be  treated  from  the  beginning  In  the 
way  that  it  is  proposed  to  deal  with  them  ultimately. 

It  is  not  within  my  province  to  discuss  the  general  question  of  the 
treatment  of  such  men.  Ranging  as  they  do  from  the  shameless 
coward  and  the  open  rebel  to  the  man  who,  whatever  may  be  thought 
of  the  soundness  of  his  principles,  is  sincere  and  i.s  prepared  to  sacri- 
fice everything  for  them,  it  is  difficult  to  devise  a  means  of  treatment 
applicable  to  all  cases. 

During  the  course  of  my  investigations  I  have  had  many  conversa- 
tions with  Objectors  and  others,  and  in  consequence  have  formed  some 
opinion  on  the  subject,  and  if  required  I  shall  be  glad  to  place  it 
before  the  Department. 

I  submit  the  following  recomniendalions  as  to  the  future  con- 
duct of  the  institution:  — 

(1)  That  the  Barracks  be  used  as  a  place  of  detention  for 
military  offenders  only,  and  that  objectors  to  military  sei-vice 
suould  not  be  sent  there. 

(2)  That  the  personnel  of  the  staff  be  changed.  So  far  as  I 
can  ascertain,  none  of  the  present  staff  possesses  any  experience 
or  particular  qualification  fitting  him  for  this  kind  of  work. 
Some  are  clearly  quite  unfit  to  act  as  prison  warder.^.  I  suggest 
that  the  new  staff  be  composed  of  specially-chosen  men,  none 
under  the  rank  of  a  non-commissioned  officer. 

(3)  That,  in  addition  to  the  military  official  visitors  pro- 
vided for  by  Regulation  11,  the  Minister  should  appoint  suitable 
person.s,  lioins  civilians,  with  duties  and  powers  similar  to 
those  of  a  visiting  justice  of  a  civil  prison,  and  that  all  mem- 
bers of  the  Pri.sons  Board,  the  Inspector  and  Deputy-Inspector 
of  Prisons  and  the  Stipendiary  Magistrate  of  the  district  be  so 
appointed  ex  officio. 

1   have  the  linnnur  to  ])(\  etc., 
(Signer])  .1.  (iliORGt:    !..   HllWITT. 


148 


XXVI.— AFTER    THE   VERDICT. 

The  long-delayed  report,  with  its  verdict. of  guilty,  and  the  Magis- 
trate's declaration  that  the  officials  at  the  Detention  Barracks  had 
lied  to  him,  while  the  statements  of  the  prisoners  were  substantially 
true,  was  like  a  bombshell  dropped  among  the  National  Government 
supporters;  but  only  the  Labour  members  were  ready  to  force  the 
Government's  hands  in  the  matter. 

On  December  6,  .Mr.  L.  M.  Isitt  (Christchurch  North)  asked  the 
Minister  of  Defence,  without  notice,  "whether  any  punishment  had 
been  allotted,  and,  if  so,  what  punishment  it  was,  on  the  men  who  were 
responsible  for  the  cruelties  practised  on  the  military  defaulters  in 
the  Wanganui  Detention  Barracks."  Sir  James  Allen  said  "the  report 
of  the  Commission  recommended  the  removal  of  the  staff.  The  staff 
had  all  been  removed  except  the  lieutenant  in  command,  and  he  would 
have  been  removed  but  for  the  otitbreak  of  influenza,  which  had  ren- 
dered it  difficult  to  at  once  replace  him."  Mr.  Isitt  asked  "if  that 
meant  that  the  men  responsible  had  been  dismissed  or  merely  removed 
to  another  position?"     Sir  James  Allen:  "The  staff  has  been  removed." 

On  the  same  day,  also  without  notice,  I  sought  information  from 
the  Minister  as  to  "whether  the  House  would  be  afforded  an  opportun- 
ity to  discuss  the  Wanganui  Report,  and,  if  so,  when?  Also,  whether 
he  would  lay  on  the  table  all  the  papers  in  connection  with  the  term 
of  office  of  Lieutenant  Crampton?"  Sir  James  Allen  replied  that 
"anything  that  was  not  of  a  confidential  character  in  connection  with 
the  officer  referred  to — and  he  did  not  know  that  there  was  anything 
confidential — he  would  be  glad  to  lay  upon  the  table.  In  respect  to  a 
discussion  upon  the  report  of  the  inquiry  referred  to,  he  might  say 
that  the  honourable  member  had  an  opportunity  of  discussing  that 
report  at  any  time  he  liked;  but  he  could  not  see  that  there  was  any 
object  in  wasting  the  time  of  the  House  over  a  discussion  upon  the 
report   now." 

On  December  9,  Mr.  Witty  (Riccarton)  asked  the  Minister  of  De- 
fence, "if  it  was  correct  that  one  Smith,  formerly  Lieutenant  Cramp- 
ton's  right-hand  man  at  the  Wanganui  Detention  Barracks,  was  at 
present  a  sergeant  in  the  military  police  at  Christchurch;  and,  if  so, 
was  that  the  removal  the  Minister  spoke  if?"  Sir  James  Allen  replied 
that  "he  could  not  tell  the  honourable  gentleman,  but  would  make 
enquiries.    At  present  he  did  not  know." 

The  papers  in  connection  with  Crampton's  Samoan  record  were  not 
laid  on  the  table  of  the  House,  and  when  it  appeared  that  all  discussion 
was  likely  to  be  burked,  I  took  advantage  of  the  third  reading  of  the 
Appropriation  Bill  to  raise  a  protest.  My  remarks  are  reported  in 
"Hansard"  thus:  — 

"I  wish  to  refev  to  the  case  of  Lieutenant  Crampton,  a  man  who 
was  formerly  Provost-Marshal,  Commissioner  of  Police,  and  Judge  of 

144 


AFTER  THE  VERDICT. 

Native  Affairs  at  Samoa.  He  became  involved  in  trouble  with  a  native 
women  there.  He  was  courtmartialled  three  times.  He  escaped  on 
the  more  serious  immoral  charge,  but  was  found  guilty  of  having 
assaulted  a  woman.  It  was  proved  that  he  had  thrashed  her  with  a 
stick.  For  that  crime  he  was  merely  reprimanded,  and  his  return  to 
New  Zealand  was  recommended.  He  came  back  to  New  Zealand,  and 
for  some  reason  best  known  to  themselves,  the  Defence  Department 
placed  him  in  control  of  the  Wanganui  Barracks,  and  gave  him  charge 
of  the  Conscientious  Objectors  and  other  military  defaulters,  and  we 
have  had  laid  on  the  table  of  the  House  the  report  of  the  Magistrate, 
Mr.  Hewitt,  showing  that  Lieutenant  Crampton,  while  in  charge  at 
Wanganui,  was  guilty  of  almost  indescribable  brutalities,  so  far  as  the 
prisoners  under  him  were  concerned.  I  want  to  ask  for  an  assurance 
that  this  man  will  not  be  retained  as  a  military  officer,  that  men  will 
not  be  placed  under  his  charge,  and  that  he  will  not  be  allowed  to 
exercise  the  powers  over  them  which  he  exercised  over  the  prisoners  at 
Wanganui.  I  want  to  go  further  than  that,  and  demand  from  the 
Government  that  Lieutenant  Crampton  shall  be  placed  on  trial  for  the 
crimes  of  which  he  was  guilty  at  the  Wanganui  Barracks.  I  think  the 
House  ought  to  insist  on  the  fullest  explanation  by  the  Government 
as  to  why,  knowing  Lieutenant  Crampton's  record,  knowing  the  serious 
charge  on  which  he  had  been  tried  al  Samoa,  knowing  that  he  had 
been  found  guilty  of  brutally  ill-treating  a  half-caste  woman — why, 
knowing  all  this,  he  was  still  allowed  to  retain  his  position  as  an 
officer  in  the  Defence  Forces,  and  why  he  was  given  that  important 
position  at  Wanganui.  I  have  made  in  this  House  and  outside  it  re- 
peated attempts  to  get  at  the  bottom  of  this  case,  and  to  get  Lieu- 
tenant Crampton's  record  as  regards  Samoa,  but,  for  some  unaccount- 
able reason,  delays  occurred  that  were  irritating,  and  which  seemed 
to  those  of  us  outside  the  inner  circle,  to  be  altogether  inexplicable. 
The  Christchurch  '  Sun  '  has  given  the  public  the  information  which  J 
have  given  to  this  House,  and  I  think  the  position  is  a  most  serious 
one.  ...  I  ask  from  the  Cabinet  an  explanation  with  regard  to 
Crampton,  and  an  assurance  that  he  will  not  be  allowed  to  remain 
a.  day  longer  in  the  Defence  Forces  of  New  Zealand." 


XXYll.—  THE    COURT]\rARTJAL. 

The  "trial"  of  J.  W.  Crampton,  litutenant,  on  charj^os  of  havino; 
ill-treated  prisoners  at  Wanganui  Military  Detention  Barracks  was 
commenced  at  the  Drill  Hall,  Wanganui,  on  Wednesday,  January  29. 

The  court  consisted  of  Lieut. -Col.  Colquhoun  (president).  Major 
Hume,  Major  Macksey,  Major  Hcnty.  Major  -Asworth,  Major  Talbot, 
and  Captain  Smith. 

145 


ARMAGEDDON   OR  CALVARY. 

Captain  Hudson  was  prosecutor,  and  Captain  Baldwin  judge-advo- 
cate. 

Prior  to  the  date  of  the  courtmartial  I  had  communicated  with 
the  Minister  of  Defence  urging  that  the  men  who  had  been  subjected 
to  the  treatment  complained  of  should  be  permitted  to  be  represented 
by  counsel — a  request  which  the  Minister  refused. 

The  prisoner  was  represented  by  Mr.  N.  G.  Armstrong,  of  Wan- 
ganui — who  appeared  as  junior  counsel  to  Mr.  Loughnan  (Palmerston 
North). 

The  drawing  of  the  class  line  received  some  emphasis  when 
Crampton,  under  guard,  came  into  court,  and  immediately  sat  down 
without  waiting  for  the  court's  permission.  The  Army  Act  provides 
that  a  common  soldier  must  not  sit  unless  the  court  allows  him  to 
do  so,  but  an  officer  has  the  right  to  sit  without  the  court's  per- 
mission. 

I  made  an  application  to  be  permitted  to  assist  the  prosecutor, 
quoting  from  the  Manual  of  Military  Law,  section  42,  footnote  c,  as 
follows: — "If  the  prosecution  is  instituted  at  the  instance  of  a  civilian, 
that  civilian  may  be  in  court  and  assist  the  prosecutor,  but  he  cannot 
speak  or  take  part  himself  in  the  prosecution,  except  as  a  witness, 
as  (subject  as  to  the  rule  as  to  counsel)  the  prosecutor  must  under 
this  rule  be  in  every  case  subject  to  military  law,  though,  of  course, 
this  requirement  does  not  extend  to  counsel  appearing  for  the  prose- 
cution." I  pointed  out  that  no  one  would  seriously  dispute  that  I 
was  the  instigator  of  the  present  proceedings.  The  first  charge  that 
men  had  been  ill-treated  at  Wanganui  Detention  Barracks  Lad  been 
made  by  myself  at  Reefton  on  May  of  last  year;  and  since  that  time, 
both  in  the  press,  on  the  public  platform,  and  from  the  floor  of  the 
House,  T  had  repeatedly  demanded  a  trial.  The  present  proceedings, 
I  insisted,  arose  out  of  my  demands,  and  were,  therefore,  instituted 
at  my  instance. 

Mr.  Armstrong  objected  to  the  application  being  granted.  He 
contended  that  the  instigator  should  be  something  more  than  the 
writer  of  letters  to  the  Minister  and  newspaper  articles,  or  the  making 
of  speeches  either  on  the  platform  or  in  Parliament.  He  should 
have  special  qualifications  to  assist  the  prosecutor,  and  he  denied  that 
Mr.  Holland  had  those  qualifications.  The  Judiie-Arlvocate  interjected 
that  the  word  was  not  "instigated"  but  "instituted"- — which  was  a 
different  matter.  Mr.  Armstrong  proceeded  to  say  that  the  real 
institutor  of  the  proceedings  was  Crampton  himself. 

Captain  Hudson,  prosecutor,  pointed  out  that  the  question  was 
rather  one  of  "conferring"  and  not  so  much  "assisting."  He  did  not 
think  that  he  could  bo  assi.sted  very  much  by  .Mr.  Holland,  but  had 
no  objection  whatever  to  the  application  being  granted.  It  was  the 
prosecutor's  duty  to  ascertain  the  truth,  and  he  would  welcome  any 
assistance  in  that  direction. 

The  Judge-Advocate  strongly  opposed  the  application.      He  argued 


THE  COURTMAUTIAL. 

that  it  would  have  been  necessary  for  Mr.  Holland  to  have  legally 
instituted  the  proceedings  to  entitle  him  to  the  privilege  conferred  by 
the  clause  he  had  quoted.  Mr.  Holland  did  not  come  within  the 
scope  of  the  word  "instituted."  It  applied  only  where  a  civilian  could 
give  material  a.ssistancc  to  the  prosecutor. 

The  president,  after  conferring  with  the  other  menitxr.s,  said  that 
the  court  was  compelled  to  take  its  law  from  the  judge-advocate,  and 
must,  therefore,  rule  that  .Mr.  Holland's  application  could  not  be 
granted. 

An  application  by  Mr.  Armstrong  for  an  adjournment  of  the  pro- 
(•eedings  was  successful,  the  Court  deciding  to  adjourn  till  February  12. 

No  Crown  witnesses  had  been  brought  to  Wanganui  for  the  trial, 
which  seemed  to  indicate  that  the  adjournment  had  been  arranged 
previously. 

An  incident  in  connection  with  Mr.  Tom  .Moynihan  reveals  that  the 
Defence  Department  is  so  utterly  mismanaged  that  it  cannot  even 
locate  the  men  in  its  employ.  Mr.  Moynihan  was  employed  as  a 
member  of  the  Medical  Corps  at  King  George's  Hospital,  Rotorua.  A 
day  or  two  prior  to  the  courtmartial  the  authorities  were 
seeking  his  address  in  order  to  call  him  as  a  witness.  The  ^Vel- 
lington  office  apparently  communicated  with  the  Greymouth  office, 
asking  for  the  address,  and  the  Greymouth  office  applied  to  Mr.  Moy- 
nihan's  father  at  Otira  for  the  necessary  information. 

The  second  sitting  of  the  Court  took  place  on  February  12.  There 
were  in  all  eleven  charges  against  Crampton.  The  first  was  that  he 
had  ill-treaied  Harry  Wilson  (a  Conscientious  Objector)  by  grabbing 
him  by  the  neck  and  allowing  two  non-commissioned  officers  to  placo 
a  military  pack  on  his  shoulders. 

Wilson  described  how  Crampton  became  annoyed  because  he  re- 
fused to  "sir"  him,  and  also  because  he  told  him  (Crampton)  that  he 
was  not  "Private"  Wilson,  but  Mr.  Wilson.  Crampton  sentenced  him 
to  three  days'  bread  and  water;  his  own  clothes  were  stripped  from 
him  and  he  was  forcibly  dressed  in  uniform.  He  then  described  his 
treatment  by  the  guards,  concluding  with  the  statement  that  when  he 
refused  to  obey  Cramplon's  order  to  i)ut  on  the  pack.  Crampton 
caught  him  by  the  hair  with  both  hands  ;in(l  pulltd  bi.-^  head  almost 
to  the  ground. 

While  .Mr.  Wilson  was  in  the  box.  he  was  asked  by  Mr.  Ixiugbnan 
(counsel  for  Crampton):  "Did  the  letter  sent  to  'Truth'  wind  up  with 
these  words:  'This  is  signed  by  eight  Conscientious  Objectors"?"  The 
answer  was  "I  don't  think  so."  (A  itferencf-  to  Mr.  Wilson's  letter 
to  .Mr. Mark  Fagan-  of  which  the"Tniih'  leittr  was  laiuely  a  copy — 
shows  that  .Mr.  Wilson  uave  the  names  of  the  eiuht  nun  by  whom  he 
had  been  auihorised  to  sign.) 

t':iptain  Hudson  sought  to  ask  the  witntss  if  he  had  ever  been  in- 
duced   by    Crampton    to   attach    his    siL-^nature    to   any    document;     but 

147 


ARMAGEDDON   OR  CALVARY. 

counsel  for  Crampton  strongly  objected,  and  the  Court  upheld  the 
objection. 

Quartermaster-Sergt.  Porter  said  Smith  brought  "Wilson  into  his 
office,  where  the  pack  was  kept.  Wilson  was  knocked  about  until  he 
put  it  on.  Crampton  then  caught  Wilson  by  the  hair  and  shook  hi«j 
head.  He  then  ordered  Wilson's  hair  to  be  cut  off,  and  this  was 
eventually  done.  Crampton  caught  Wilson  by  the  neck  and  pushed 
his  head  down.  Crampton  and  Sergt.  Smith  were  yelling  and  bawling 
continuously  at  the  man.  It  was  mostly  bad  language  they  were 
using. 

Cross-examined  by  Mr.  Loughnan,  witness  said  he  was  quite  posi- 
tive Crampton  seized  Wilson  by  tiie  neck  and  pushed  him  to  the 
ground.  Great  violence  was  used.  He  could  see  no  reason  for  the 
violence.    Wilson  was  shook  as  if  he  were  a  dog. 

Crampton's  evidence  was  to  the  effect  that  he  was  not  handlin,-; 
Conscientious  Objectors,  but  soldiers.  "He  received  verbal  instruc- 
tions from  headquarters  that  no  Conscientious  Objectors  would  be 
sent  to  Wanganui  Barracks."  He  claimed  he  had  the  right  to  use 
what  force  was  necessary  when  a  soldier  obstinately  refused  to  do 
his  duty.  Wilson  "showed  dumb  insolence."  He  admitted  giving 
Wilson  three  days'  solitary  confinement  on  bread  and  water,  and 
ordering  him  to  be  deprived  of  his  mattress.  He  denied  that  he  had 
seized  Wilson  by  the  hair,  and  also  gave  an  absolute  denial  to 
Porter's  evidence.  When  a  communication  came  from  headquarters 
giving  the  names  of  eight  men  whom  it  was  alleged  had  signed  the 
"Truth"  letter,  he  "made"  inquiries,  and  the  men  "voluntarily  signed 
a  document  denying  cruelty  or  that  they  signed  a  letter  to  'Truth.'  " 
Two  of  them,  he  said,  declared  that  all  they  did  was  to  sign  a  blank 
paper. 

On  the  third  day  of  the  Court's  sitting,  Crampton's  counsel  (Mr. 
Loughnan)  made  an  astonishing  revelation  as  to  the  purpose  of  the 
courtmartial.  Crampton,  he  said,  "WAS  NOT  BROUGHT  THERE 
TO  ANSWER  CHARGES  LEVELLED  AGAL^ST  HIM,  BUT  IN  ORDER 
TO  CLEAR  HIS  CHARACTER  OF  CHARGES  MADE  THROUGHOUT 
THE  COUNTRY  BY  A  TOTALLY  IRRESPONSIBLE  TRIBUNAL, 
APPOINTED  UNDER  GOODNESS  KNOWS  WHAT  AUTHORITY." 

The  Court's  decision  was  reserved. 

The  second  charge  against  Crampton  was  that  he  allowed  un- 
necessary force  to  be  used  to  compel  Harry  Wilson  to  do  pack  drill. 

During  Wilson's  evidence,  objection  was  raised  to  the  term 
"slaui^htcr  yard,"  applied  by  Lieut.  Crampton  (according  to  the  evi- 
denff)  to  the  yard  in  which  drill  took  place.  Wilson  described  how 
he.  was  pushed  and  punched  by  Lancc-Corporal  Walker,  with  Cramp- 
ton uiving  orders,  while  they  were  endeavouring  to  make  him  do  pack 
drill.     He  had  refused  to  obey  the  double  quick  march  because  it  was 

H8 


THE  COURTMAKTIAL. 

a  military  order.  He  was  firmly  resolved  not  to  obey  any  military 
orders. 

Quartermaster-Sergt.  Porter  said  Wilson  was  driven  round  the 
yard  with  a  pack  on,  and  with  Smith  and  another  man  on  either  sido 
holding  an  arm,  and  Crampton  chasing  round  giving  orders.  Cramp- 
ton's  orders  were:  "Keep  him  going."  There  was  a  little  blood  ilyin;; 
around.  Wilson  was  knocked  about  in  a  way  no  sensible  man  would 
treat  a  dog.  He  (witness)  had  told  Crampton  he  was  breaking  the 
regulations.  Crampton  wa.s  in  the  habit  of  blackguarding  him  (wit- 
ness)  in  the  office. 

When  the  courtmartial  resumed  on  the  fourth  day  the  Judge- 
Advocate  argued  that  "the  law  permitted  force  to  be  used  for  the 
maintenance  of  military  discipline."  He  combatted  the  argument  of 
Capt.  Hudson,  the  prosecutor,  that  "any  force  was  unnecessary 
because  under  no  circumstances  could  force  be  used  to  a  soldier  except 
in  accordance  with  the  commands  of  a  competent  tribunal."  The 
Judge-Advocate  then  proceeded  to  "stress  the  importance  of  maintain- 
ing and  enforcing  discipline."  If  the  force  used  by  Crampton  was 
used  to  maintain  military  discipline,  he  contended,  no  offence  had  been 
committed. 

The  Court  reserved  its  decision. 

The  third  charge  against  Crampton  was  the  treatment  of  William 
Bertram  Donovan,  who  served  25  days'  detention  at  Wanganui. 

In  the  course  of  his  evidence,  Donovan  said  that  on  his  arrival  at 
the  Barracks,  Crampton  asked  if  he  would  carry  a  rifle  and  wear  a 
uniform.  He  replied  that  he  would  not-  that  he  objected  to  military 
service.  Crampton  said:  "1  don't  recognise  military  objectors  here," 
and  added:  "Take  biiii  to  the  slauuhter  yard."  .^fter  a  pack  had 
been  put  on  him.  and  he  refused  to  march,  Corporal  Jenkins  put  a 
rope  round  his  neck,  and  started  to  pull  him  round  the  yard. 
Occasionally  Smith  and  Parmenter  pushed  behind.  When  he  fell, 
buckets  of  water  were  dashed  into  his  face  while  he  was  lying  on  the 
ground.  .-VftcM-  about  tbiee  quarters  of  an  hour  of  thi.s  treatment, 
he  saifl  he  was  done  and  conseutcci  to  inaicli.  Ci'ainpton  said: 
"Vou  have  just  lasted  three  quartt  rs  of  an  hour  which  is  five 
minutes  less  tlian  the  man  wlio  lasted  lonmst."  lie  ("witness) 
was  again  told  lo  niardi,  and  he  did,  Wliilc  he  was  marching 
Guard  Williams  was  kickinL;  liiui  from  h(>hind  and  I'armenter  on 
several  occasions  imnclird  liiin  on  tlie  back  of  tin-  neck.  Smith 
also  pulled  witness  \<\  the  hair  and  nos(  ,  .Accused  CCrampton) 
hit  him  under  tlie  ctiin  with  a  cane  and  told  tiim  to  bold  his  head 
up.  The  blow  was  hard  riion"li  to  laiak  the  si<in  and  make  it 
bleed.  Crampton  also  hit  him  on  the  liand  and  told  him  to  swin;; 
his  arms.  liis  hand  was  all  swolb  n  across  tlie  knuckles  and  he 
was  also  cut  under  the  cliin.  1  .aiu  e-< 'orjioral  Faulkner  on  several 
occasions    pushed    him    into    Uie    w;ill.      .At    tlu^    jiresent    time    he    was 

14'i 


ARMAGEDDON   OR  CALVARY. 

serving  a  term  of  a  year  and  eleven  months'  imprisonment  for 
refusing  to  take  his  kit  at  Featherston.  He  was  a  Conscientious 
Objector  and  a  Roman  Catholic. 

Thomas  Moynihan,  who  was  at  the  Wanganui  Detention  Bar- 
racks during  May  of  1918,  deposed  that  as  he  was  on  his  way  to 
his  own  cell  he  saw  Donovan  in  the  "slaughter  yard"  with  a  rope 
around  his  neck,  and  immediately  after  heard  bumping  and  scuffling 
in  the  yard,  followed  by  groans  and  the  sound  of  dragging. 

Donald  Kerr  Porter,  son  of  Colonel  Porter,  and  who  was  Quarter- 
master-Sergeant at  the  time,  said  he  saw  Donovan  being  ill-treated. 
He  was  thrown  on  the  ground  and  bumped  against  the  wall.  Witness 
thought  he  was  dead.  He  saw  Crampton  telling  Donovan  to  get 
up,  and  Jenkins  pulling  on  the  rope  round  Donovan's  neck  and 
dragging  him  along  a  few  yards.  He  (witness)  then  left.  Ho 
expected  to  hear  next  day  that  Donovan  was  dead. 

Crampton  admitted  that  he  "put  his  hand  under  Donovan's  chin 
to  make  him  hold  his  head  up,"  but  denied  that  he  struck  him. 
Donovan  had  a  slight  scratch  on  his  cheek  which  witness  attribut- 
ed  to    careless   handling   of   the   rifle. 

J.  M.  M.  Jenkins,  corporal,  said  "the  only  time  Crampton  touched 
Donovan  was  to  correct  the  position  of  the  rifle." 

Dr.  Anderson,  medical  ofl3cer  attached  to  the  Barracks,  said  he 
examined  Donovan,  but  found  no  marks  on  his  neck. 

Thomas  William  Smith,  formerly  a  sergeant  at  Wanganui  Bar- 
racks, gave  evidence  in  support  of  the  defence.  He  admitted  that 
water  was  flung  over  Donovan,  but  said  if  Crampton  struck  him 
under  the  chin  with  a  cane  he  did  not  see  it. 

The    Court's    decision    was    reserved. 

The  fourth  charge  against  Crampton  was  taken  on  the  fifth 
day  of  the  "trial,"  when  he  was  charged  with  permitting  unnecessary 
force  to  be  used  to  compel  Donovan  to  obey  an  order. 

Donovan  and  ^Moynihan  gave  evidence  on  similar  lines  to  that  ten- 
dered by  them  on  the  previous  day. 

Alister  Beaton  said  that  while  undergoing  28  days'  detention,  he 
heard  scuffling  in  the  yard  and  a  loud  groan.  He  was  on  his  way 
from  the  bathroom  to  his  cell,  and  looking  into  the  yard  saw 
Donovan  in  a  limp  condition.  The  next  morning  he  saw  red  marks 
on  Donovan's  neck  and  scratches  on  both  sides  of  his  face. 

At  this  stage  the  prosecution  asked  for  leave  to  put  in  as  evidence 
the  depositions  of  Private  Joseph  McConville  before  Mr.  J.  G.  L. 
Hewitt,  S.M.,  at  the  magisterial  inquiry,  the  witness  now  being 
overseas.  Counsel  for  accused  objected,  and  the  Court  ruled  tho 
tvioence   was   not   admissable. 

Benjamin  Winch,  a  member  of  the  Military  Police  at  the  Barracks, 
made  reference  to  the  treatment  of  Fitzpatrick,  and  said  he  knew 
that   Donovan  had   been  knocked   about. 

150 


THE  COURTMARTIAL. 

Crampton,  in  the  course  of  his  evidence,  said  "he  had  been  ad- 
vised by  the  civil  police  that  Donovan  was  a  dangerous  character." 
A  rifle  had  been  handcuffed  to  Donovan's  wrist  "as  witness  wanted 
to  make  sure  he  could  not  use  it  on  the  staff."  He  admitted  that 
three  buckets  of  water  were  poured  over   Donovan. 

Under  cross-examination  by  Captain  Hudson,  Crampton  said:  "If 
he  had  allowed  a  man  to  beat  him,  it  would  have  meant  the  end 
of  his  career  at  the  barracks.  There  was  no  difference  in  the 
treatment  of  a  dangerous  character,  but  witness  would  be  more 
on    his    guard. 

Arthur  George  Faulkner,  lance-corporal,  admitted  that  he 
had  helped  to  pull  Donovan  along,  but  said  it  was  untrue  that 
Donovan  was  pulled  around  by  the  hair  or  nose.  "Donovan  tried  to 
bite  Sergeant  Smith,  and  on  that  occasion  Smith  caught  Donovan  by 
the  nose  and  pushed  his  head  up." 

On  the  sixth  day.  Major  Osborne  Lilly,  Director  of  Personal  Ser- 
vices, was  a  witness.  He  described  a  visit  made  by  him  to  the 
Wanganui  Barracks  and  his  interview.s  with  the  men  whose  names 
were  attached  to  the  "Truth"  letter.  Replying  to  one  of  the  men,  he 
said  he  "formed  the  impression  that  Pallesen  was  not  as  sound  in  his 
mind  as  might  be  expected  from  a  normal  individual."  He  spoke 
to  all  the  men  except  Wilson  and  .Moynihan. 

In  reply  to  Captain  Hudson,  the  Major  admitted  that  he  had  not 
carried  out  his  investigations  in  "a  proper  legal  manner."  Had  he 
done  so,  he  said,  the  persons  against  whom  accusations  were  made 
should  have  been  present.      "It  was  not  a  secret  investigation." 

John  .Malcolm  .Morris  Jenkins  said  he  saw  no  ill-treatment  of  Dono- 
van; and  Sergt. -Major  Bell  described  the  methods  employed  at  the 
Adessia  Detention  Barracks  in  Egypt,  under  Imperial  control.  At 
the  time  of  his  visit  in  February  of  last  year,  there  were  200  soldiers 
in  prison  there,  and  they  had  some  ])ad  cases.  All  the  men  were  told 
what  would  happen  if  they  refused  to  ol)ey  orders.  No  refusal  was 
allowed;  force  would  hi'  ai)plied  if  a  man  refused  to  cany  out  orders. 
"He  had  seen  it  used  on  more  tlian  one  occasion;  it  happened  fairly 
frequently."  If  a  man  refused  to  put  liis  uniform  on  he  was  taken 
in  a  room  awa}'  from  (•vcrjone  else  and  given  tlie  (ii)tion  of  putting 
on  the  uniform  himself  or  having  it  put  on  by  the  staff.  If  he  still 
refused  he  was  forcibly  dressed.  If  the  man  struuuhd.  more  force 
would  have  to  he  used  to  overcome  His  resistance,  and  sometimes  he 
would  get  knocked  about  for  his  own  fault.  Witness  had  seen  force 
used  on  several  occasions  to  make  a  man  marcli.  Tlie  man  was  gen- 
erally seized  by  each  arm  and  marched  along.  If  he  refused  to  march 
then  he  would  he  fre(|ueiitly  rlrauued  by  the  feet.  lie  would  be  kept 
on  the  move  by  relay.<  of  staff  until  he  decided  to  march.  Another 
method  was  to  [ilace  liim  either  two  or  three  in  a  four  when  the  parade 
was  in  columns  of  fours  and  i:ive  the  order  to  (luick  march.  He  had 
either  to  march  or  he  walked  ovt  i-.      The  ineiiind  was  generally  effec- 

151 


ARMAGEDDON   OR  CALVARY. 

live.  A  rope  was  sometimes  placed  around  the  man's  waist  and  he 
was  pulled  round  till  he  was  willing  to  march.  Ill-treatment  and  foul- 
play  were  absolutely  forbidden  in  the  barracks,  such  as  punching  a 
man  or  causing  him  any  bodily  injury.  There  were  safeguards 
against  the  abuse  of  force.  The  barracks  were  frequently  inspected, 
and  at  such  times  the  men  under  detention  had  an  option  of  com- 
plaining, and  if  the  soldier  could  prove  that  the  staff  had  used 
unnecessary  force  to  make  him  obey  orders,  the  staff  would  get  very 
short  shrift.  Witness  remembered  a  man  refusing  to  shave  before 
going  on  parade.  He  was  taken  to  his  cell  and  forcibly  shaved. 
These  methods  were  generally  successful  in  breaking  down  resistance 
and  making  men  submissive.  .  The  treatment  at  this  barracks  was 
very  much  more  lenient  than  at  the  Citadel,  which  was  another  deten- 
tion barracks.     The  Adessia  was  known  as  "The  Nursery." 

This  witness,  under  cross-examination,  insisted  that  the  Superin- 
tendent of  the  Detention  Barracks  was  the  judge  of  the  amount  of  force 
to  be  used.  "On  what  would  he  base  his  judgment?"  asked  Captain 
Hudson.  "On  the  amount  of  resistance  used  by  the  soldier,"  replied 
the  sergeant-major.  "Would  he  not  be  guided  by  rules  of  Military 
Detention  Barracks?"  was  the  next  question.  "No,"  was  the  reply: 
"he  would  not  think  of  them;  it  would  be  a  case  of  man  against  man." 

Counsel  for  Crampton  argued  that  the  force  used  "was  merely 
sufficient  to  overcome  the  resistance." 

Captain  Hudson,  in  closing  his  case,  remarked  that  accused  and 
others  had  frankly  admitted  that  a  rifle  was  strapped  to  Donovan,  a 
rope  put  around  him,  and  water  thrown  over  him  when  prostrate. 
According  to  the  rules,  Donovan  should  have  been  reported  to  the 
officer  commanding  to  be  dealt  with  under  the  Army  Act.  It  was 
clear  that  unnecessary  force  had  been  used.  There  was  nothing  in 
the  regulations  to  show  that  a  man  could  be  handcuffed  to  an  object, 
fixed  or  otherwise.  The  use  of  a  rope  was  not  authorised  in  any  way, 
and  was  a  force  that  was  unnecessary.  No  one  was  allowed  to  strike 
a  soldier,  unless  in  self  defence. 

The  Judge-Advocate  justified  the  use  of  water,  and  described 
Donovan's  account  of  his  treatment  as  "wild." 

The  Court  reserved  its  decision. 

The  fifth  charge  against  Crampton  was  that  of  striking  John 
McConville,  a  soldier. 

Captain  Hudson  asked  leave  to  withdraw  the  charge,  owing  to 
McConville,  the  principal  and  only  witness,  being  overseas,  and  the 
Court  having  already  ruled  that  his  evidence  was  not  admissable. 

The  Judge-Advocate  objected  to  the  withdrawal  of  the  case.  He 
argued  that  if  the  evidence  for  the  prosecution  were  insufficient,  the 
Court  could  acquit  Crampton. 

The  Court  retired  to  consider  the  point,  and  on  its  return  did  not 
announce  its  decision. 

152 


THE  COURTMAHTIAL. 

The  sixth  charge  against  Crampton  was  that  he  permitted  un- 
necessary force  to  be  used  to  compel  McConville  to  do  pack  drill. 

Owing  to  McConville  having  been  embarked,  his  evidence  was  no; 
available,  and  the  Court  reserved  its  decision. 

The  seventh  charge  against  Crampton  was  that  he  allowed  un- 
necessary force  to  be  used  to  compel  Thomas  Moynihan  to  do  pack 
drill.  The  case  was  called  immediately  prior  to  the  Court's  adjourn- 
ment on  the  sixth  day. 

On  the  seventh  day  of  the  "trial,"  Moynihan  entered  the  witness- 
box,  and  told  the  Court  that  while  in  the  barracks,  on  1st  May,  he 
was  sentenced  to  pack  drill.  A  uniform  was  given  to  him;  he  refused 
to  put  it  on,  and  it  was  forcibly  put  on.  He  was  considerably 
knocked  about.  Lieut.  Crampton  was  not  present.  At  his  request, 
witness  was  taken  before  Lieut.  Crampton,  and  complained  that  he 
had  been  kicked  over  the  heart.  Witness  showed  him  the  marks. 
Lieut.  Crampton  asked  Corporal  Jenkins  what  it  was  for,  and  he 
replied  that  witness  had  refused  to  put  on  his  uniform.      "Oh,  if  that 

is  so,  we  will  soon  —  fix  you  up,"  Crampton  said.      Witness  was 

taken  back  to  the  cell,  where  the  uniform  was  again  forcibly  put  on 
him.  Witness  was  ordered  to  pack  drill  after  church.  The  pack 
was  put  on  him  forcibly,  and  witness  was  ordered  to  march.  Cor- 
poral Parmenter  bumped  his  head  on  the  wall,  and  he  was  pimched 
on  the  back.  Lieut.  Crampton  was  present  then.  Witness  was 
ordered  to  march,  but  did  not.  He  was  punched  around  the  yard  foi- 
a  few  turns  and  bumped  into  the  wall.  Parmenter,  Jenkins,  Faulkne" 
and  Byrne  used  to  take  turns  about,  and  punched  him  round  the  yard 
for  a  considerable  time.  Then  they  had  a  confab  as  what  to  do  next. 
Lieut.  Crampton  came  in  and  out  of  the  yard  and  asked  if  witness 
would  give  in.  Faulkner  grabbed  witness  by  the  hair  and  pulled  him 
along  the  yard.  Witness  struck  him.  Then  they  all  got  on  to  him  and 
knocked  him  about,  p-aulkner  kicked  him  while  he  was  on  the  ground. 
Lieut.  Crampton  came  into  the  yard  then  and  made  some  remarks 
to  witness  which  had  the  effect  of  stopping  him  from  grnanint;.  He 
then  ordered  the  guards  to  carry  on  with  witness.      He  said:    "Push 

his   head   through   the   b wall."      The   guards   did    their   best    to 

do  it. 

Someone  suggested  takinu  a  photograph,  which  Lieut,  Crampton 
adopted,  and  took  photographs.  Lieut,  (^rarapton  asked  if  witness 
would  carry  on,  saying,  "I'll  beat  you.  .Moynihan,  Lin  a  pig-headed 
Irishman  like  you  are."  Witness  asked  to  be  given  one  guard  at  a 
time,  and  he  would  not  care.  His  rifle  was  tied  on  to  his  left  arm 
with  a  string,  and  kept  coniini,'  off  his  shoulder.  Faulkner  bumped 
it  against  his  face,  and  kept  doing  it  until  blood  ran  down  his  fac'^. 
Jenkins  told  P"'aulkner  to  cut  it  out  as  it  was  spoiling  the  uniform. 
They  kept  at  witness  for  an  hour,  and  after  that  he  was  ordered  inside. 
Witness  then  told  them  he  would  give  in. 


AKMAGEDDON    OR  CALVARY. 

In  reply  to  Mr.  Loughnan,  witness  said  he  was  very  violently 
kicked  on  many  occasions,  first  in  the  cell,  and  then  afterwards  in  the 
yard.  He  was  kicked  over  the  head,  on  the  small  of  the  back,  and 
on  the  legs.  After  witness  struck  Faulkner,  the  latter  used  to  be 
allowed  to  get  at  him,  and  then  knocked  him  down,  and  struck  him 
-with  his  boots.  The  rifle  was  tied  on  to  his  shoulder  with  a  piece 
of  string,  which  went  round  his  neck.  Witness  was  exceedingly  sore 
after  this  experience,  and  was  for  weeks  afterwards.  He  was  black 
and  blue  on  the  back.  He  stood  to  be  photographed.  Somebody 
kicked  his  feet  into  position,  and  Faulkner  held  the  rifle  while  he 
was  being  photographed.  It  was  before  he  was  photographed  that 
Faulkner  struck  him  with  the  rifle  barrel.  He  was  examined  by  a 
doctor  at  the  barracks  some  time  after  the  occurrence.  It  was  not 
the  next  day;  it  was  just  before  he  came  away.  It  might  have  been 
the  5th  when  it  took  place.  He  would  deny  that  he  was  examined  on 
the  6th.  He  would  contradict  Lieut.  Crampton  if  he  said  in  witness's 
presence  that  he  told  the  doctors  that  witness  had  complained  thai  • 
he  had  been  kicked  over  the  heart  the  previous  day.  The  doctor 
did  not  examine  him  at  any  time  as  to  the  injury  to  the  heart  he 
had  complained  of.  After  he  came  out  of  the  padded  cell,  where 
he  had  been  for  48  hours  on  bread  and  water,  witness  was  too  weak 
to  carry  on,  and  the  doctor  examined  him.  This  was  before  the  pack 
drill.  Witness  denied  that  the  barrel  of  the  rifle  was  put  through 
the  shoulder  strap  and  tied  to  his  wrist  at  the  commencement  of  the 
drill  and  remained  in  that  position  throughout  the  drill. 

Roland  Gordon  Halkett,  who  was  undergoing  detention  at  the 
barracks,  said  he  heard  scuffling  and  struggling  in  the  yard,  and 
accused  asking  Moynihan  if  he  would  do  any  drill.  Witness  heard 
bashing  and  bumping  against  the  wall,  and  Crampton  say:  "Give  him 
some  more,"  and  "Keep  him  going."  Shortly  afterwards  witness  heard 
groans  coming  from  the  yard,  and  accused's  voice  telling  Moynihan  to 
get  up.  Witness  saw  Moynihan  two  days  after  with  the  marks  on  his 
face. 

Quartermaster-Sergt.  Porter  said  that  Moynihan,  while  doing  pack 
drill,  was  punched  by  Parmenter  and  kicked  by  Faulkner. 

Dr.  Anderson  said  Moynihan  complained  of  an  injury  to  his  chest 
about  the  heart,  and  witness  could  find  no  trace  of  it. 

Accused  Crampton  said  Moynihan  was  given  pack  drill  for  refusing 
to  put  on  uniform.  As  he  refused  to  march  witness  ordered  the  guards 
to  take  turns  in  pushing  him  round  the  yard.  Moynihan  finally 
agreed  to  do  his  drill.  When  Moynihan  came  to  the  barracks  first 
he  declared  he  would  only  fight  for  Ireland,  and  he  (Crampton)  ac- 
cordingly regarded  him  as  "a  defiant  shirker." 

Arthur  George  Faulkner  denied  that  he  kicked  Moynihan  or  grabbed 
him  by  the  hair.  John  M.  M.  Jenkins  and  Edward  Byrne  denied  that 
Moynihan  was  either  hit  or  kicked.  The  latter  witness,  however,  said 
ho  was  not  present  all  the  time. 

154 


THE  COURTAEARTIAL. 

The  eighth  charge  against  Crampton  was  heard  on  the  ninth  day 
of  the  "trial."  Crampton  was  charged  with  having  permitted  the 
staff  to  use  unnecessary  force  to  compel  Alister  Beaton  to  do  pack 
drill. 

Alister  Beaton  said  Crampton  ordered  him  pack  drill  for  two  hours, 
also  to  be  deprived  of  his  mattress  for  two  days  on  a  charge  of 
"insolence."  He  was  forcibly  dressed  in  denims,  and  taken  to  the 
yard,  where  he  declined  to  take  the  rifle  handed  to  him.  It  was 
handcuffed  to  his  wrist.  He  was  ordered  to  march,  and  refused. 
Crampton  put  a  rope  round  his  neck,  and  he  was  dragged  round  thp 
yard  by  Sergt.  Smith,  Corporal  Parmenter  pushing  behind.  Witness- 
was  continually  being  bumped  into  a  corner  of  the  wall,  and  he 
started  to  bleed  freely  from  the  face.  At  Crampton's  orders  Smith 
got  witness  by  the  hair  and  dragged  him  round  the  yard,  a  handful 
of  hair  coming  out.  Smith  caught  hold  again  and  another  handful 
eame  out.  After  a  time  witness  consented  to  hold  the  rifle.  While 
he  was  marching  round,  Private  Haines  trod  on  his  heels  to  quicken 
his  step.  During  one  of  the  rounds,  Private  Byrne  came  in  and  rained 
punches  on  his  back  and  neck  for  some  little  time.  After  witness 
had  consented  to  march,  Crampton  asked  if  he  would  put  the  uniform 
on,  and  on  receiving  a  refusal,  ordered  him  to  go  round  again. 
During  one  of  the  rounds,  Crampton  poked  him  in  the  ribs  with  his 
cane.  On  one  of  the  last  rounds,  witness  fell  to  the  ground;  he  got 
up  as  quickly  as  he  could,  cannoned  into  the  back  wall  and  then  hit 
the  other  wall,  the  blow  nearly  knocking  him  out.  Crampton  then 
called  a  halt  and  ordered  a  uniform  to  he  put  on  him.  After  a  little- 
more  marching,  Crampton  asked  him  if  ho  had  any  complaint  to  make. 
He  at  first  did  not  an.swor,  but  eventually  said  he  had  none.  Some 
time  later  Crampton  asked  the  men  at  tea  if  any  who  had  obeyed 
orders  had  been  ill-treated.  .\o  one  replied.  He  then  asked  if  any 
who  had  disobeyed  order?;  had  been  ill-treated  Witness  told  hiiu  he 
had  got  a  pretty  rough  handling.  He  replied:  "My  dod.  you  did! 
And  you  will  c:et  it  again."  The  nisht  of  the  park  drill  witness  wa.s 
examined  t)y  a  doctor,  who  asked  bow  he  got  the  abrasions  on  th:- 
face.  Crampton  answered  for  witness,  and  said  it  was  an  omission 
on  witness's  part  that  day. 

Cross-examined  hy  Mr.  Louuhnan,  witness  said  Bryne  was  the  only 
man  who  struck  him.  As  a  result  of  the  blows,  the  back  of  his  head 
and  neck  were  sore  and  stiff.  He  did  not  show  this  rondition  to  the 
doctor.  The  doctor  was  making  a  mistake  in  sayini;  the  scratch  on 
his  face  was  slight.  It  was  so  bad  that  two  days  later  scabs  formed 
and  prevented  him  shavini;.  Witness  said  hv  told  the  Magistrate 
that  he  considered  the  treatment  that  he  got  in  tin-  yard  was  brutal. 
It  did  not  look  very  mucli  on  paper,  hut  for  an  untrained  man  to  go 
through  it  was  very  had.  He  was  quite  sure  the  rope  was  put  round 
his  neck,  but  it  was  not  tight. 

Harry  Wilson  said  he  was  working  when  he  saw  Beaton  being 
pulled  around  by  a  rope.  in.'i 


ARMAGEDDON   OR  CALVARY. 

The  Court  reminded  witness  that  in  his  statement  to  the  Magis- 
trate he  said  that  Beaton  was  being  "dragged,"  and  demanded  to  know 
why  he  now  said  "pulled." 

Witness  replied  that  he  used  the  words  "pulled"  and  "dragged" 
in  the  same  sense.  In  his  cell  he  heard  shouts  and  orders  coming 
from  the  yard,  and  sickening  thuds  coming  from  the  wall.  He  heard 
Crampton  say:  "Push  his  head  through  the  wall,"  and  "I  would  rather 
bury  you  than  let  you  win."  He  also  heard  Crampton  say:  "Oh, 
Beaton,  the  sight  of  blood  does  my  eyes  good."  This  lasted  about 
twenty  minutes.  Afterwards  witness  saw  blood  on  the  walls  of  the 
building  in  the  yard  where  Beaton  had  been,  also  splashes  of  blood 
all  round  the  yard.  Witness  saw  Beaton  at  tea  time,  and  his  face  was 
badly  knocked  about — his  cheeks  reminded  him  of  pieces  of  raw 
steak. 

R.  G.  Halkett  said  he  was  working  in  the  kitchen  when  he  heard 
orders  and  scuffling  coming  from  the  yard.  He  subsequently  saw 
Beaton  pass  the  kitchen  door,  and  noticed  that  his  face  was  bleeding. 
Two  days  later  he  noticed  marks  on  Beaton's  face. 

Thomas  Moynihan  stated  that  he  saw  Beaton  in  the  yard  with  the 
rope  round  his  neck  and  being  pulled  along.  This  was  while  witness 
was  passing  on  the  way  to  his  cell.  He  subsequently  heard  scuffling 
in  the  yard.  He  saw  Beaton  after  he  came  out  of  the  yard;  there 
was  blood  on  his  face  and  the  skin  was  off.  He  saw  hair  in  the  yard 
next  morning  and  blood  on  the  wall.  The  hair  was  Beaton's,  and 
there  was  a  handful  of  it. 

Quartermaster-Sergt.  Porter  said  he  saw  Beaton  with  the  pack  on 
on  two  or  three  occasions.  On  the  first  occasion  witness  saw  Beaton 
punched  and  knocked  against  the  fence  by  Smith  and  Parmenter. 
After  his  pack  drill,  Beaton  and  several  others  were  not  examined  for 
several  days,  perhaps  for  a  week. 

Crampton  said  Beaton's  attitude  on  admission  was  one  of  "defiance 
and  insolence."  He  admitted  that  the  rifle  was  tied  to  Beaton's 
shoulder  and  lashed  round  his  body  with  rope.  It  was  also  hand- 
cuffed to  his  wrist.  "He  proved  most  obstinate,  and  it  took  two  men 
practically  the  whole  time  to  push  and  pull  him  round."  For  fifteen 
minutes  Beaton  put  up  a  big  fight  against  the  force  used.  The 
discipline  maintained  in  the  Barracks  was  everything  that  could  be 
desired.  He  denied  saying  that  "the  sight  of  blood  did  his  eyes 
good."  He  denied  that  he  gave  Smith  any  order  to  seize  Beaton  by 
the  hair,  nor  did  he  see  him  being  dragged  about  the  yard  by  the  hair 
of  the  head.  He  did  not  think  it  extraordinary  that  Beaton's  nose 
began  to  bleed. 

Edward  Byrne  (one  of  the  staff  engaged  when  Beaton  was  doiny, 
pack  drill)  denied  that  he  struck  Beaton  at  any  time,  or  that  Smith 
dragged  Beaton  by  the  hair.  Beaton  "offered  a  violent  resistance  in 
the  yard." 

Sergeant  Smith  said  that  Beaton  "did  not  fight  at  all,"  but  woulrl 

15« 


THE  COURTMARTIAL. 

not  march.  He  did  not  hear  Crampton  use  the  expressions  alleged 
by  Beaton,  nor  did  he  seize  Beaton  by  the  hair  and  drag  him  along. 
The  rope  was  used  not  for  pulling  him  round  the  yard,  but  for  pulling 
him  to  his  feet. 

After  hearing  addresses  from  prosecutor  and  counsel,  the  Couri 
reserved  its  decision. 

The  ninth  charge  against  Crampton  was  that  on  May  5,  1918,  he 
permitted  unnecessary  force  to  compel  William  Smith  Badger  to  do 
pack  drill. 

W.  S.  Badger  said  he  came  to  the  Barracks  at  the  end  of  May.  He 
was  ordered  drill  the  day  after  he  arrived.  Sergt.  Smith  handcuffed 
the  rifle  to  his  wrist,  and  then  pushed  witness  from  him  with  a  punch. 
Crampton  came  into  the  yard,  and  when  Smith  told  him  witness  would 
not  carry  on,  he  ordered  his  cane  to  be  brought  from  the  office.  After 
Crampton  came  into  the  yard  Smith  rushed  at  witness  with  his  teeth 
bared.  Previous  to  this  Smith  had  kicked  him,  but  he  did  not  know 
whether  Crampton  was  then  present.  Smith  turned  witness  round, 
pushed  him,  and  continued  to  punch  him  round  the  yard.  Crampton 
came  alongside  and  used  very  bad  language  to  witness,  and  tapped 
him  under  the  wrist  with  his  cane,  telling  him  to  keep  him  hand  up. 

Cross-examined  by  Mr.  Loughnan,  witness  said  he  had  been  kicked 
and  punched  by  Smith  before  he  was  certain  Crampton  had  come  into 
the  yard. 

Mr.  Loughnan  was  proceeding  to  read  portions  of  the  statement 
witness  had  made  before  the  Magistrate,  when  witness  asked  for  the 
whole  of  his  evidence  to  be  read,  and  was  told  peremptorily  by  the 
Court:  "Your  duty  before  this  Court  is  to  answer  questions."  Where- 
upon the  witness  strongly  protested  against  this  procedure.  It  was 
only  fair,  he  urged,  that  the  whole  of  his  evidence  should  be  read. 
"Don't  argue,"  commanded  the  Court;  "answer  the  questions  put  to 
you."  Witness  firmly  denied  that  he  complained  to  Crampton  about 
Smith  kicking  and  assaulting  him. 

Frederick  Pallesen  said  he  was  bein.u  drilled  in  the  yard  wit'j 
Badger,  when  the  latter  put  his  rifle  down  and  refused  to  carry  on. 
"Sergt.  Smith  then  came  in,  carrying  a  rope,  and  he  walked  up  to 
Badger  and  kicked  him.  '  Witness  was  immediately  ordered  out  of 
the  yard. 

Crampton,  in  his  evidence,  alleged  that  Badger  had  complained  to 
him  that  Smith  had  kicked  him.  When  witness  asked  Smith  about  it 
he  denied  the  charge,  but  admitted  that  "he  had  caught  Badger  by 
the  shoulders,  put  his  knee  behind  him,  and  straishtened  him  up  and 
gave  him  a  push  ahead."  He  (witness)  "could  positively  swear  that 
Badger  was  not   kicked  or  punched  by  Sergt.  Smith." 

The  tenth  charge  against  Crampton  was  that  he  permitted  the  staff 
to  use  unnecessary  violence  to  compel  F.  Pallesen  to  do  pack  drill.  He 
pleaded  not  guilty.  157 


ARMAGEDDON   OR  CALVARY. 

Captain  Hudson  asked  for  a  ruling  on  the  point  whether  the  force 
referred  to  must  be  physical  force. 

The  CJourt  ruled  that  the  force  used  must  be  physical  force,  and 
the  case  broke  down  on  the  technicality. 

The  eleventh  charge  against  Crampton,  heard  on  the  tenth  day 
of  the  "trial,"  was  that  he  permitted  unnecessary  force  to  be  used  by 
the  staff  to  compel  George  Carian  to  obey  orders. 

George  Carian  said  the  morning  after  his  arrival  he  was  ordered 
by  Corporal  Williams  to  have  a  bath,  and,  after  bathing,  was  kicked 
and  also  punched  on  the  back  of  his  neck  by  the  corooral  as  he  moved 
along  the  passage  on  his  way  to  his  cell. 

Eugene  Hurlihy  said  that  on  the  night  when  Carian  came  in  he 
took  a  fit  in  his  cell,  and  witness  heard  Crampton  tell  Carian  that 
if  he  took  any  of  his  fits  there  he  would  get  his  guts  kicked  out. 
Smith  was  in  the  cell  also,  and  told  him  if  he  wanted  to  die  he  would 
lend  him  a  razor,  and  if  he  didn't  have  enough  guts  to  cut  his  throat, 
he  would  lend  him  a  gun,  and  he  could  shoot  himself.  Witness  said 
he  saw  no  force  used  on  Carian  while  Crampton  was  present. 

Dr.  Anderson  deposed  that  he  saw  Carian  occasionally  during  his 
stay  in  the  Barracks,  and  he  complained  only  of  palpitation  of  the 
heart  and  generally  out  of  sorts. 

Crampton  denied  the  statement  made  by  Hurlihy.  No  such 
language  was  ever  used  to  Carian.  Carian  had  never  laid  a  complaint, 
although  every  man  under  detention  knew  of  the  proper  procedure. 
Witness  knew  nothing  of  the  occurrence  at  all.  Carian  was  certainly 
punished  for  inattention  on  parade;  he  wa^  given  an  hour's  pack 
drill,  which  witness  considered  sufficient.  Carian,  according  to  a 
statement  from  the  A.A.G.,  Palmerston  North,  was  a  confirmed  soap- 
eater  and  malingerer. 

The  Court  found  Crampton  not  guilty  of  the  whole  eleven  charges, 
and  "honourably  acquitted"  him. 

Immediately  after  the  courtmartial,  Crampton  was  given  the  posi- 
tion of  Area  Officer,  Group  20,  Wanganui.  The  whole  of  the  prisoners 
left  the  Wanganui  Barracks  on  January  6,  the  building  was  handed 
back  to  the  civil  authorities  on  February  10,  and  Crampton  (who 
remained  behind  to  clear  up  various  matters)  relinquished  commanr! 
on  March  25,  receiving  the  appointment  mentioned  above.  A  further 
reference  to  the  case  will  be  found  among  the  Appendices. 

On  September  2,  I  placed  the  following  notice  of  motion  on  the 
Parliamentary  Order  Paper:  "That  there  be  laid  on  the  table  of  the 
House  all  the  papers  in  connection  with  Lieut.  Crampton's  term  of 
office  at  Samoa,  including  the  full  report  of,  and  evidence  in,  his  trial 
by  courtmartial  at  Samoa."  At  the  date  of  publication,  I  am  still 
awaiting  the  opportunity  to  move  it. 

158 


XX\T:II.— ENTHRONING  PRUS8TANISM 

On  December  5,  the  Expeditionary  Forces  Amendment  Bill  was 
brought  down  "by  message  from  His  Excellency  the  Governor- 
General."  The  legislative  fiction  of  the  "first  reading"  was  gone 
through.  Then,  immediately,  the  Minister  of  Defence  moved  the 
second   reading,    briefly   explaining   the   several    clauses. 

The  Bill  sought  to  "extend  by  six  months  the  period  of  enlistment 
of  members  of  the  Expeditionary  Force."  This  was  t'je  language  in 
which  the  Minister  described  the  proposal.  What  it  really  meant 
was  the  extension  of  Conscript  Service  for  an  additional  six  months 
to  the  term  prescribed  in  the  principal  Act.  The  .Minister  becamo 
angry  when,  during  the  debate  on  the  third  reading,  I  put  it  this  way. 
His  reason  for  proposing  the  change,  he  said,  was  that  the  troops 
could  not  be  demobilised  in  the  time  provided  in  the  principal  Act. 
The  clause  (2)  which  covered  this  proposal  and  clauses  3  and  4  ap- 
peared to  me  to  be  designed  to  tighten  the  military  bonds.  Clause  5 
had  to  do  with  military  hospitals,  and  clause  6  was  purely  a  washing- 
up  clause,  to  give  effect  to  the  section  of  the  principal  Act  which 
provided  for  the  abolition  of  the  Expeditionary  Force  Reserve  after 
the  termination  of  the  war.  Clause  7  was  the  best  clause  in  the  Bill. 
It  provided  for  the  payment  of  bonuses  to  soldiers,  but  still  it  was 
made  clear  that  this  was  not  to  be  given  as  a  right,  but  was  to  be 
regarded  as  a  "free  gift,"  which  might  be  withheld  or  deferred  or 
subjected  to  terms  and  conditions  at  the  Minister's  will. 

Clause  8  enacted  that:  (1)  The  Minister  of  Defence,  as  .soon  as 
practicable  after  the  passing  of  this  Act,  shall  cause  to  be  prepared 
and  published  in  the  Gazette  a  list,  to  be  called  the  Military  Default- 
ers' List,  in  which  shall  be  set  out,  so  far  as  ascertainable,  the  names, 
occupations,  and  abodes  of  all  men  who  since  the  commencement  of 
the  present  war  with  Germany  and  before  the  passing  of  this  Act — 
(a)  Have  been  convicted  by  courtmartial  of  any  offence  of  such  a 
nature  as  to  indicate,  in  the  opinion  of  the  Minister,  an  intent  per- 
uianently  to  evade  or  refuse  to  fulfil  their  obligations  of  military  ser- 
vice in  the  present  war;  or  (h)  having  been  called  up  for  service  with 
the  New  Zealand  Expeditionary  Force  under  the  Military  Service  Act, 
1016,  have  deserted  from  that  force  or  have  others  isp  made  default 
in  the  performance  of  the  obligations  imposed  on  them  by  or  in  pur- 
suance of  that  Act  in  such  manner  as  to  indicate,  in  the  opinion  of 
the  Minister,  an  intent  permanently  to  evade  or  refuse  to  fulfil  their 
obligations  of  military  service  in  the  present  war;  or  (o  having  been 
members  of  the  Expeditionary  Force  Reserve  constituted  by  the  Mili- 
tary Service  Act,  irn6,  have  illegally  evaded  enrolment  in  that  Re- 
serve in  such  circumstances  as  to  indicate,  in  the  opinion  of  the  Min- 
ister, an  intent  permanently  to  evade  military  service  in  the  present 
war. 

159 


ARMAGEDDON    OR  CALVARY. 

Under  clause  9,  Religious  Objectors  (i.e.,  Objectors  who  were  mem- 
bers of  churches  which  declared  military  service  to  be  contrary  to- 
divine  revelation)  were  exempted  from  the  Military  Defaulters'  List. 
Clause  10  provided  for  the  amendment  of  the  list  "by  deleting  the 
names  of  men  inserted  therein  in  error,  by  adding  thereto  the  names 
of  men  who  have  been  omitted  therefrom  in  error,  and  by  correcting 
or  supplying  any  error  or  defect  in  the  name  or  description  of  any 
military  defaulter,"  with  the  proviso  that  "the  entry  of  any  name  in 
the  Military  Defaulters'  List  shall  not  be  invalidated  by  any  error  in 
the  name  or  description  of  the  military  defaulter  so  referred  to."  By 
clause  11  it  was  provided  that  "any  man  whose  name  has  been  entered 
in  the  Military  Defaulters'  List  within  the  time  and  in  the  manner 
prescribed  by  regulations  under  this  Act  may  appeal  to  a  Stipendiary 
Magistrate  on  the  ground  that  he  has  been  entered  in  the  list  in 
error,  and  the  magistrate  shall  have  jurisdiction  to  hear  and  deter- 
mine such  appeal,  and  if  the  appeal  is  allowed  the  name  of  the 
appellant  shall  be  removed  from  the  list." 

Clause  12  prohibited  the  return  to  New  Zealand  of  military  de- 
faulters who  were  not  in  New  Zealand  at  the  time  of  the  passing  of 
the  Act  for  10  years  after  it  was  passed,  rendering  them  liable,  so  often 
as  they  returned  within  that  period,  to  arrest  with  warrant,  to  twelve 
months'  imprisonment  on  summary  conviction,  and  to  deportation  on 
the  expiry  of  the  sentence. 

Clause  13  provided  that — (1)  All  military  defaulters  are  hereby 
deprived  of  civil  rights  for  a  period  of  10  years  from  the  passing  of 
this  Act.  (2)  Every  man  so  deprived  of  civil  rights  shall  be  incap- 
able—  (a)  Of  being  appointed  or  of  continuing  to  hold  any  office  or 
employment  in  the  service  of  the  Crown  or  of  any  local  or  other  pub- 
lic authority;  (b)  of  being  elected  or  appointed  or  of  continuing  to 
hold  office  as  a  member  of  either  House  of  Parliament  or  as  a  mem- 
ber of  any  local  or  other  public  authority;  (c)  of  being  enrolled  as 
an  elector  or  voting  at  any  election  of  a  member  or  members  of  either 
House  of  Parliament  or  of  a  member  or  members  of  any  local  or  other 
public  authority. 

Clause  14  constituted  any  exercise  or  attempted  exercise  of  civil 
rights  by  a  military  defaulter  an  offence  rendering  him  liable  to  12 
months'  Imprisonment;  and  under  a  similar  penalty  clause  15  pro- 
hibits any  change  of  name  by  military  defaulters. 

The  discussion  on  the  second  reading  of  this  vicious  measure  was 
brief  indeed,  only  the  Minister  and  Sir  John  Findlay  speaking  on  the 
motion.  No  adequate  opportunity  was  allowed  members  to  make 
themselves  acquainted  with  the  main  features  of  the  Bill.  It  is  a  sound 
contention  that  no  measure  involving  great  changes  should  be  carried 
through  its  second  reading  until  the  full  text  of  it  has  been  at  least 
14  days  before  the  people,  so  that  the  electors  may  have  the  oppor- 
tunity of  objecting  to  its  provisions  if  they  desire,  and  also  in  order 
that  the  members  of  Parliament  may  know  what  they  are  asked  to 

160 


ENTHRONING  Prj^SSIANISM. 

vote  upon.  This  Bill  was  rushed  through  its  three  readings  in  two 
days,  notwithstanding  that  its  enactment  involved  the  ruthless  de- 
struction of  a  principle  held  dear  in  British  law  for  long  years:  the 
principle  that  a  man  should  not  be  punished  twice  for  the  same  offence. 
The  members  of  the  National  Government  had  endeavoured  to  excuse 
their  jailing  of  Conscientious  Objectors  two  and  three  times  over  for 
the  offence  of  refusing  to  be  a  soldier  by  speciously  pronouncing  that 
every  time  a  man  was  given  an  order  to  take  a  kit  and  failed  to  obey 
a  new  offence  was  constituted.  This  plea  won  a  hearing  from  a  few 
people;  but  the  new  law  was  designed  to  add  an  extra  punishment 
which  could  not  be  explained  away  by  any  process  of  plausibility. 
The  man  who  had  already  served  three  sentences  was  now  to  be  fur- 
ther punisned  by  having  his  franchise  taken  away  from  him  and  by 
being  deprived,  so  far  as  the  Government  had  the  power  to  deprive 
him,  of  the  right  to  earn  bread  and  butter  for  his  children.  Worse 
still,  it  was  to  be  retrospective  in  its  application — a  retrospective 
punishment  that  was  to  hit  the  helpless  child,  the  innocent  wife, 
harder  even  than  it  could  hit  the  husband  and  father  who  had  re- 
fused to  be  a  soldier.  It  was  a  law  that  was  aimed  at  the  opponents 
of  the  Government  which  framed  it.  It  was  read  by  some  for  an 
effort  on  the  part  of  the  Government  to  save  itself  from  the  votes  of 
the  victims  of  its  own  wretched  wrong-doing.  Again,  not  only  was  it 
a  retrospective  law,  but  it  was  a  retrospective  law  made  after  the 
war  had  ended  and  when  there  could  be  no  suggestion  that  such  a 
law  was  needed  for  the  purpose  of  assisting  to  improve  the  war  situa- 
tion. 

When  the  House  went  into  committee  there  was  again  little  dis- 
cussion on  the  various  clauses.  The  Labour  Party  was  suffering  seri- 
ously as  a  result  of  the  influenza  epidemic.  Mr;  Hindmarsh  had  died; 
Mr.  Walker  was  ill;  Mr.  Fraser  had  not  wholly  recovered  from  his 
attack;  and  I  was  in  bed,  not  yet  recovered  from  my  relapse. 

Clause  12  apparently  did  not  prove  stringent  enough  to  suit  a 
majority  of  the  members.  In  its  original  form  (as  proposed  by  the 
Minister)  it  read:  "If  any  inilitary  defaulter  is  not  in  New  Zealand  at 
the  passing  of  this  Act.  it  shall  not  be  lawful  for  him  at  any  time 
within  ten  years  after  the  passing  of  this  Act  to  return  to  New  Zea- 
land, and  if  and  as  often  as  he  does  so  he  may  be  arrested  by  any 
constable  without  warrant,  and  shall  be  liable  on  summary  conviction 
to  imprisonment  for  any  term  not  exceeding  12  months."  Illogical, 
illegal,  and  vicious  as  the  proposal  was  in  this  form,  it  was  still  not 
considered  drastic  enough,  and  Mr.  Statham  (Dunedin  Central)  se- 
cured the  insertion  of  the  words  "or  remains  in  New  Zealand"  after 
the  words  "as  often  as  he  does  so." 

Mr.  McCombs  sought  to  add  a  new  clause  which,  if  carried,  would 
have  prevented  the  additional  punishment  contemplated  by  the  Act 
from  being  inflicted  upon  men  who  had  already  endured  legal  punish- 
ment for  refusing  military  service.  Mr.  McCombs's  proposed  new 
6  161 


ARMAGEDDON   OR  CALVARY. 

clause  read:  "Notwithstanding  anything  hereinbefore  contained,  the 
name  of  any  man  who  has  before  the  passing  of  this  Act  been  pon- 
victed  by  courtmartial  of  any  offence  of  the  nature  indicated  in  para- 
graph (a)  of  sectijn  8  of  this  Act  shall,  after  the  expiry  of  the  sen- 
tence of  imprisonment  or  detention  imposed  on  him  for  that  offence, 
be  omitted  from  the  Military  Defaulters'  List,  and  notice  of  such  re- 
moval shall  be  published  in  the  Gazette."  This  sensible  amendment 
was  emphatically  negatived  on  the  voices. 

Late  at  night  on  December  5  I  received  a  telephone  message  from 
Mr.  Fraser  to  the  effect  that  the  Expeditionary  Forces  Amendment  Bill 
had  been  that  day  rushed  through  its  first  and  second  reading  stages, 
was  almost  through  the  committee  stage,  and  that  the  third  reading 
would  be  taken  next  day.  Mr.  Fraser  expla.  jed  the  anti-Labour 
nature  of  the  Bill;  and  I  resolved  that  I  would  get  to  the  House  next 
day  in  time  for  the  third  reading.  We  agreed  that  a  fight  against  the 
Bill  should  be  made  along  the  lines  of  the  Labour  Party's  declared 
policy. 

Mr.  Fraser  had  not  fully  recovered  from  his  illness,  and  I  was  a 
very  sick  man  when  we  met  in  the  Chamber  on  the  6th.  It  was  on 
this  day  that  Mr.  McCombs's  amendment  was  defeated  in  committee. 
It  was,  in  fact,  the  last  item  in  committee,  all  the  Bill's  clauses  having 
been  disposed  of  on  the  previous  day.  Immediately  following  the  re- 
jection of  Mr.  McCombs's  clause,  the  third  reading  of  the  Bill  was 
proceeded  with.  The  Government  was  forcing  the  already  indecent 
pace  of  its  rush  legislation  to  permit  Mr.  Massey  and  Sir  Joseph  Ward 
to  leave  for  the  Peace  Conference — which,  in  any  case,  they  were  not 
morally  entitled  to  attend  as  representatives  of  the  people  of  New 
Zealand.  Every  public  interest  in  the  matter  of  legislation  was  being 
ruthlessly  sacrificed  to  facilitate  that  quite  unnecessary  trip — the 
whole  harmfulness  of  which  in  its  results  we  have  yet  to  learn. 

Had  it  not  been  for  the  Labour  Party,  the  third  reading  would  have 
gone  through  without  discussion.  We  found  there  were  times  when, 
the  Government  whips  having  cracked,  the  Government  supporters 
— Tory  and  Liberal  alike — were  prepared  to  function  dumbly.  This 
was  one  such  time  apparently.  But  our  attack  produced  the  miracle. 
The  dumb  spake. 

It  was  10  p.m.  when  Mr.  Fraser  rose  (in  accordance  with  our  ar- 
rangement) to  oppose  the  third  reading.  His  speech  was  unimpassioned, 
unanswerably  logical,  and  deeply  convincing.  But  Reason  found  no 
abiding  place  in  the  Chamber  on  this  occasion.  Mr.  Fraser  declared 
that  it  was  a  well-known  principle  in  jurisprudence  that  retrospec- 
tive laws  were  bad,  and  pointed  out  that  such  laws  were  beyond  the 
power  of  Congress  in  the  United  States.  The  Bill  before  the  House 
was  not  only  retrospective,  but  provided  for  punishing  men  who  had 
already  been  punished.  He  appealed  for  the  widest  possible  toler- 
ance, and  also  for  an  effort  on  the  part  of  honourable  members  to 
understand  a  point  of  view  foreign  and  antagonistic  to  their  own.      He 

162 


ENTHRONING  PRU^SSIANISM. 

quoted  from  utterances  of  Professor  Gilbert  Murray,  the  Earl  of  Sel- 
borne,  and  Lord  Parmoor  in  support  of  tolerance,  and  mentioned  that 
men  like  Lord  Hugh  Cecil,  Lord  Henry  Benlinck,  the  Archbishop  of 
Canterbury,  and  Lord  Kitchener  had  favoured  reasonable  considera- 
tion of  the  claims  of  Conscientious  Objectors.  He  twitted  the  Liberals 
in  the  Cabinet  with  having  abandoned  their  Liberalism,  and  declared 
that  the  House  had  no  right  to  pass  this  legislation.  He  questioned, 
indeed,  if  it  had  the  right  to  pass  any  legislation  at  all.  Parliament, 
having  extended  its  own  life,  was  not  representative  of  the  peoplj, 
and  the  Government  was  exercising  its  power  to  disfranchise  a  section 
of  the  people  who  might  reasonably  be  expected  to  vote  against  it. 
Therefore,  the  Government's  policy  was  to  disfranchise  Its  political 
opponents.  If,  some  day  in  the  future,  a  Labour  Government,  follow- 
ing' the  precedent  created  by  the  National  Government,  should  set  out 
to  disfranchise  the  property-holders,  would  any  one  in  the  House  say 
a  word  in  defence  of  that  action?  Yet  this  was  exactly  what  the 
National  Government  was  now  doing— disfranchising  its  opponents. 
The  war  was  over  and  finished,  and  so  far  from  serving  any  useful 
purpose  this  Act  would  only  drive  certain  men  (who  could  be  used  not 
in  any  military  capacity  but  in  a  social  capacity  in  many  directions) 
into  the  position  of  permanent  outlaws  in  the  community.  The  most 
useful  legislation  that  could  be  passed  to  cement  the  harmony  and 
goodwill  of  the  people  would  be  to  follow  the  example  of  South 
Africa  and  bring  in  a  Bill  of  indemnity  and  oblivion.  The  number  af- 
fected by  this  revengeful  and  vindictive  penal  legislation  was  com- 
paratively small.  By  no  stretch  of  the  imagination  could  their  pun- 
ishment be  of  any  use  to  the  State,  but  by  persisting  in  this  sort  of 
legislation  the  members  of  the  Government  were  providing  that  while 
they  professedly  set  out  to  defeat  Prussianism  in  Europe,  they  were 
enthroning  it  in  New  Zealand. 

While  Mr.  Fraser  was  speaking,  irritation  and  discomfiture  were 
written  very  plainly  on  the  faces  of  the  extreme  militarists,  and  it 
was  natural  to  expect  that  the  more  uncontrollable  among  them 
would  be  on  their  feet  when  the  member  for  Wellington  Central  had 
finished  speaking.  But  discipline  overcame  desire,  and  no  one  arose. 
I  was,  therefore,  compelled  to  follow  my  colleague.  (I  do  not  propose 
outlining  my  speech  here.     It  will  be  found  in  llan.sard'.-^  pages.) 

Then  the  storm  broke  loose.  Even  in  Parliament  jneu  are  to  be 
found  who  mistake  hysterical  declamation  lor  etTtctive  reply,  lierce 
invective  and  frothy  verbiage  for  argument,  windy  .shriekings  and  tor- 
rential outpourings  for  proof  of  patriotism.  All  these  manifestations 
were  in  evidence  on  December  tj.  Hound  ahoiu  midnight  the  three 
speeches  in  reply  to  Mr.  Fra.ser  and  myself  w(  re  made.  Karely  have 
Parliamentary  speeches  achieved  a  lower  standard.  One  was  a  fren- 
zied diatribe — just  that  and  nothing  more;  and  smne  one  has  said 
that  frenzied  diatribes  are  ever  the  lotien-ripe  fruit  of  attenuated 
mentalities.       All     of     the     speeches     rang     like     the     bellicose     pro- 

163 


ARMAGEDDON   OR  CALVARY. 

duct  of  militaristic  minds  inflamed  with  age.  In  none  of  tbe 
speeches  was  there  an  absence  of  misrepresentation.  In  at  least  two 
of  them  there  were  regrettable  and  discreditable  slanderings  of  honour- 
able and  courageous  men.  It  was  made  to  pass  for  a  clinching  argu- 
ment that  "if  a  man  would  not  fight  for  his  country  he  should  not  be 
accorded  citizen  rights  in  that  country."  But  the  fact  was  ignored  that 
the  very  men  who  were  speaking  had  refused  to  let  the  people  decide 
whether  any  man  should  be  required  to  go  out  of  the  country  to  flght  in 
a  war  that  he  was  not  permitted  to  have  any  voice  in  entering,  as  was 
also  the  fact  that  they  reserved  to  the  leaders  of  their  party  alone  the 
right  to  decide  whether  when  a  man  went  to  war  he  was  really 
"fighting  for  his  country."  Not  only  so,  but  they  ignored  as  well  the 
case  of  the  men  who  not  only  did  not  flght  for  "their  country,"  but  as 
proflteers  took  advantage  of  the  war  conditions  to  actually  plunder  the 
wives  and  children  of  the  soldiers  who  were  doing  the  fighting  for 
them. 

There  was  no  measure  of  difference  in  the  intolerance  displayed 
by  the  Tories  and  the  Liberals.  An  incident  which  revealed  the  state 
of  the  Liberal  mind  occurred  while  Mr.  Fraser  was  speaking.  He  had 
made  reference  to  the  Quakers  who,  during  the  time  of  the  Common- 
wealth and  Charles  II.,  had  been  sentenced  again  and  again  to  im- 
prisonment because  they  thought  it  an  act  of  idolatry  to  take  off  their 
hats  in  court,  and  the  Hon.  T.  M.  Wilford  interjected:  "Do  you  state 
that  the  men  who  are  in  jail  are  of  that  class?"  Mr.  Fraser  replied: 
"I  know  that  some  of  them  are,"  Mr.  Wilford  then  asked:  "Would 
you  like  me  to  read  what  they  have  written?"  (It  should  be  men- 
tioned that  Mr.  Wilford  was  then  Minister  of  Justice,  and  by  reason 
of  his  Ministerial  office  in  a  position  to  know  the  contents  of  private 
letters  written  to  their  friends  by  the  prisoners.)  Mr.  Fraser  re- 
torted severely:  "If  the  Minister  is  capable  of  so  dishonourable  an 
action  as  taking  private  letters  and  reading  them  publicly."  "But," 
he  added,  while  the  Minister  nursed  his  chagrin,  "some  of  those  men 
are  men  of  intellectual  and  scholastic  attainments  higher  than  any 
member  of  this  House."  "Bosh!"  said  the  Minister  of  Justice,  inele- 
gantly.    "It  is  not  bosh,"  replied  Mr.  Fraser;  "and  the  Minister  who 

is  interrupting  shows  that  he  has  not  taken  the  trouble "     Then 

Mr.  Wilford,  beaten  back  to  his  last  line  of  defence,  went  off  at  a 
wild  tangent  and  irrelevantly  asked;  "Are  you  loyal?" 

Now,  it  happened  that  a  day  previously  I  had  received  a  letter  from 
Mr.  Webb,  in  which  he  informed  me  that  21  C.O.'s  in  Kaingaroa  had 
addressed  a  letter  to  Mr.  Wilford,  offering  to  go  out  and  act  as  at- 
tendants and  helpers  in  connection  with  the  fight  against  the  in- 
fluenza epidemic.  The  only  condition  the  C.O.'s  lajd  down  was  that 
the  time  so  occupied  should  not  be  counted  off  their  sentences.  When 
I  suggested  to  Mr.  Wilford  that  he  might  read  to  the  House  this  letter 
he  admitted  having  received  it,  but  added  that  he  had  also  received 
a  similar  letter  from  the  long-sentence  men. 

164 


ENTHRONING  PRUSSIANISM. 

When  the  Minister  of  Defence,  in  making  his  reply  at  the  close  of 
the  debate,  referred  to  the  offer  of  the  C.O.'s  to  help  to  flght  the  in- 
fluenza epidemic,  the  Liberal  Minister  of  Mines  found  himself  capable 
of  making  the  spitefully  mean  interjection:  "It  would  have  been  a 
worse  epidemic."  And  the  Reform  Minister  of  Defence  was  capable 
of  agreeing.  "Yes,"  he  said;  "it  would  have  been  a  worse  epidemic." 
I  have  no  doubt  that  both  gentlemen,  as  soon  as  they  were  able  to 
think  calmly,  deeply  regretted  the  incomparable  unfairness  of  their 
remarks  (all  the  more  so  because  the  suggestion  was  quite  as  un- 
truthful as  it  was  unfair). 

When  eventually  the  House  divided  on  the  third  reading  of  the 
Bill,  the  voting  was  54  to  2 — the  two  being  Mr.  Fraser  and  myself. 
Mr.  Walker  was  ill  at  the  time,  and  Mr.  McCombs  had  left  for  home 
some  time  before  the  division — which  took  place  well  on  towards  1 
a.m.  I  may  mention  that  our  determination  to  divide  the  House  was 
made  for  the  purpose  of  securing  a  record  of  the  members  ready  to 
inflict  on  this  country  the  wickedness  of  such  a  measure  as  that  de- 
signed by  Mr.  Massey  and  Sir  Joseph  Ward  and  their  colleagues  In 
the  National  Government.  The  division  list  as  it  appears  in  Hansard 
reads: — 

AYES:  Allen,  Anderson,  Anstey,  Bollard,  Buddo,  Carroll,  Craigle, 
J.  M.  Dickson,  J.  S.  Dickson,  Ell,  T.  A.  H.  Field,  W.  H.  Field,  Forbes, 
Sir  W.  Fraser,  Guthrie,  Harris,  Henare,  Hornsby,  Hudson,  Hunter, 
Jennings,  Lee,  Luke,  McCallum,  MacDonald,  Malcolm,  Mander,  Massey, 
Myers,  E.  Newman,  Ngata,  Nosworthy,  Parr,  Pearce,  Pomare,  Poole, 
Reed,  T.  W.  Rhodes,  Russell,  Scott,  Sidey,  S.  G.  Smith,  Statham,  Sykes, 
Stewart,  Talbot,  Veitch,  Wilford,  Wilkinson,  Witty.  Wright,  Young. 

NOES:    P.  Fraser,  Holland. 

Enemies  of  the  Labour  movement  have  endeavoured  to  make  capital 
out  of  the  allegation  that  in  opposing  the  third  reading  of  the  Bill  the 
Labour  Party  opposed  bonuses  to  soldiers,  etc.  This,  of  course,  is  not 
true.  The  Labour  Party  has  consistently  fought  for  better  conditions 
for  the  soldiers,  whether  on  service  or  returned.  But  it  is  an  old  trick 
of  the  political  adversaries  of  Laliour  to  attempt  to  make  things  look 
awkward  for  Labour  members  tiy  .sandwiching  something  that  meets 
with  popular  approval  between  the  vile  clauses  of  what  is  generally 
speaking  a  bad  measure.  It  was  a  tactic  that  was  not  unknown  to 
Bismarck  in  the  worst  days  of  Prussianism.  The  Labour  members 
were  obliged  in  this  particular  instance  to  vote  against  the  Bill  both 
by  reason  of  its  attack  ui)on  the  vital  principles  of  Liberty  for  which 
Labour  stands,  and  also  because  our  ronferenco  decisions  imposed  on 
us  the  obligation  to  fi.ulit  ai,Minst  any  intensification  of  militarism. 
From  the  viewpoint  of  the  I,ahour  inovenient.  there  was  nothing  that 
could  have  been  put  into  the  Bill  to  make  it  good  enough  for  any  well- 
informed  T-abour  Party  or  any  honest   Labour  man  to  lend  support  to 

165 


ARMAGEDDON   OR  CALVARY. 

while  its  major  clauses  challenged  Magna  Charta  itself,  provided  for 
the  strangling  of  Liberty  and  the  destruction  of  the  prerogatives  of  the 
people;  while  the  Bill  as  a  whole  proposed  to  add  tyrannical  punish- 
ments to  punishments  already  inflicted,  to  take  away  from  upright, 
clean-living,  pure-rninded  men  of  Religious  and  Socialist  principle 
the  right  to  work  for  the  State  and  the  right  to  vote — a  disability  not 
imposed  on  the  vilest  criminal.  If  the  murderer  escapes  the  gallows, 
when  he  has  paid  the  penalty  the  law  demanded,  his  civil  rights  are 
restored  to  him;  the  child-ravisher,  notwithstanding  his  awful  crime, 
has  his  right  to  work  and  vote  restored  to  him;  likewise  the  burglar, 
the  embezzler,  the  pickpocket,  the  common  thief.  But  the  class-con- 
sciousness of  the  ultra-militarists  of  the  National  Government  could 
not  tolerate  the  extension  to  the  highest  type  of  Christian  or  the 
loftiest-minded  idealist  among  the  working  men  and  the  intellectuals 
the  privileges  of  citizenship  they  readily  restored  to  the  proved  crim- 
inal. The  harm  that  accrues  to  Society  when  the  ruling  class  imposes 
such  a  condition  is  incalculable.    Morality  is  in  its  decadence. 


XXIX.— THE  PROBLEM  OF  THE  CONSCIENCE 

Whoever  with  open  mind  shall  read  the  story  of  the  Conscienco 
men  of  New  Zealand  all  too  imperfectly  written  into  these  pages  will 
surely  need  no  argument  against  the  further  intense  militarisation 
of  the  Dominion.  Whoever  without  prejudice  shall  read  the  record  oi: 
the  atrocities  inflicted  on  these  New  Zealanders  by  other  New  Zea- 
landers  will  not  need  to  be  convinced  that,  while  it  required  great 
courage  to  face  the  lightning  flame  that  leaped  from  the  wild  storm 
of  war,  great  courage  to  brave  the  hail  of  death  that  swept  across 
the  battlefield,  it  called  for  even  greater  courage  to  enter  that  fiery 
fiirnace  of  barbaric  torture  which  Mark  Brlggs,  Archibald  Baxter, 
Garth  Ballantj-ne,  and  their  comrades  passed  through.  It  is  of  such 
men  and  their  courage  that  the  eminent  Professor  James  Ward  has 
written:  "The  value  of  a  single  man  or  woman  of  open  mind,  inde- 
pendent judgment,  and  moral  courage,  who  refuses  to  be  cajoled,  is 
only  concerned  to  be  right,  and  not  afraid  to  be  singular,  deferring 
to  reason  but  not  to  rank,  true  to  their  own  self,  and,  therefore,  not 
false  to  any  man— the  value  of  such  a  man  or  woman,  I  say,  is 
priceless;  a  nation  of  such  men  would  leaven  and  regenerate  the 
world." 

The  Conscientious  Objectors  were  in  conflict  with  the  law  of  New 
Zealand — a  law  made,  it  is  true,  without  the  consent  of  the  people, 
but  still  a  law,  with  all  the  organised  force  of  the  political  class  Stat-3 
behind  it.  When  that  bad  law  was  first  promulgated  I  predicted 
in  the  leading  columns  of  "The  Worker,"  that  Labour  would  mark 
down  for  political   extinction  every  politician  guilty  of  the  crime  of 

166 


THE  PROBLEM  OF  THE  CONSCIENCE. 

Prussianising  New  Zealand.  Under  that  wicked  enactment  the 
Conscientious  Objectors  became,  in  the  generally  accepted  sense  of 
the  term,  law-breakers.  They  knew  their  position;  they  knew  the 
price  they  would  be  required  to  pay  if  they  persisted  in  giving  pride 
of  place  to  the  dictates  of  conscience.  Cheerfully  they  were  prepared 
to  pay  it.  When  the  moment  came  to  decide,  as  once  it  comes  "to 
every  man  and  nation,"  they  never  hesitated.  Hatred,  scoflang,  and 
abuse  they  chose  "rather  than  shrink  in  silence  from  the  truth  they 
needs  must  think."  Bitterly  they  were  made  to  pay  for  their  choice. 
The  intolerance  that  dominates  the  ruling  class  mind — slumming  over 
the  lessons  of  history,  superficially  regarding  the  psychic  realities, 
often  seeking  to  instal  science  as  the  handmaiden  of  stagnation — found 
wide  and  ungenerous,  often  angry  and  uninformed,  expression  in 
every  circle  where  the  problem  of  the  Conscientious  Objector  became 
the  subject  of  discussion.  Bishop  Sprott,  of  Wellington,  wandered 
into  a  maze  of  discursive  illogicalities  which  seemed  to  represent  a 
surrender  of  some  of  the  foundation  principles  of  Christianity.  Mili- 
tarists, professing  Christians  and  declared  Materialists,  raved.  The 
Chief  Justice  of  New  Zealand  found  himself  unable  to  resist  the 
temptation  to  join  in  the  contumelious  chorus.  On  a  previous 
occasion  I  was  constrained  to  direct  public  attention  to  the  Chief 
Justice's  excursions  into  the  realms  of  controversial  politics,  and 
then  insisted  that  while  the  law  which  prevents  public  servants 
from  taking  the  political  platform  remains,  its  provisions  must  apply 
to  the  Chief  Justice  equally  with  the  latest  police  probationer.  In 
the  course  of  a  recent  address  I  had  occasion  to  say:  "We  have  a 
right  to  expect  that  whoever  occupies  the  highest  judicial  position 
shall  maintain  a  judicial  viewpoint,  and  shall  at  no  time  and  under 
no  circumstances  permit  himself  to  indulge  in  ill-advised  attacks — 
framed  in  the  language  of  extravagance — against  any  section  of  th;i 
people,  whose  servant  he  is  held  to  be,  and  on  all  of  whom  falls  tho 
burden  of  providing  his  not  illiberal  salary.  If  the  Chief  Justice- 
becomes  unmindful  of  the  duty  he  owes  to  his  position;  if  he  strips 
off  his  judicial  robes  and  assumes  the  attitude  of  politician  and 
partisan,  then  he  must  not  complain  if  the  Labor  movement  places 
duty  before  every  other  consideration  and  offers  the  fullest  criticism." 
In  July  of  last  year,  apparently  as  chairman  of  the  Prisons  Board. 
Sir  Robert  Stout  visited  Kaingaroa  Pri.son,  and  on  his  return  he 
delivered  a  lecture  which  wa.=!  largely  of  a  political  nature,  and  tho 
spirit  of  which  would  not  have  been  calculated  to  inspire  the  average 
Conscientious  Objector  with  a  very  great  measure  of  confidence  in 
the  impartiality  of  the  Court.  The  Wellington  correspondent  of  a 
South  Island  paper  wrote  of  this  address:  "There  is  a  type  of  Con- 
scientious Objector  which  even  jail  inmates  spurn.  This  was  men- 
tioned by  Sir  Robert  Stout,  Chief  Justice,  in  an  address  on  the 
prisoners  at  Kaingaroa  Prison  Camp.  He  said  there  are  several 
prisoners  held  for  breaches  of  the  Defence  Act  and  military  regula- 

167 


ARMAGEDDON   OR  CALVARY. 

tions.  Public  conscience  is  evidently  becoming  awakened  even 
amongst  the  law-breakers,  for  some  prisoners  who  were  confined  for 
ordinary  crimes  refused  to  speak  to  military  prisoners,  saying  they 
would  not  work  with  them,  as  they  were  a  disgrace  to  the  Dominion 
in  shirking  their  responsibilities  under  our  military  law." 

From  this  report  I  was  able  to  gather  that  Sir  Robert  Stout  gave 
credit  to  the  Quakers  who  were  Conscientious  Objectors,  and  his 
antipathy  seems  to  have  been  directed  against  the  Socialist,  Irish, 
Religious,  and  other  Objectors  whose  objections  rested  on  other  than 
the  extremely  narrow  "religious"  foundations  provided  for  in  the 
Military  Service  Act.  It  is  extremely  regrettable  that  the  Chief 
Justice  should  have  found  it  possible  to  think,  and  still  more  regret- 
table that  he  should  have  given  expression  to  the  thought,  that 
because  the  sexual  criminal,  the  embezzler,  the  thief,  or  the  profes- 
sional burglar,  declared  they  would  neither  speak  to  nor  work  with 
honest,  clean-living  men,  whose  only  offence  was  the  possession  of  a 
conscience  which  forbade  the  taking  of  life,  the  fact  betokened  the 
awakening  of  a  public  conscience  amongst  the  criminal  class.  It  may 
have  meant  something  altogether  different.  It  may  have  amounted 
to  not  more  than  what  some  unhappy  criminal  conceived  to  be  the 
most  effective  method  of  convincing  a  patriotically  credulous  chair- 
man that  the  time  had  arrived  when  the  Prisons  Board  might  safely 
favour  his  release.  Even  if  it  meant  all  the  Chief  Justice  thought, 
it  was  surely  most  improper  for  the  chairman  of  the  Prisons  Board 
to  diffuse  from  the  public  platform  sentiments  calculated  to  create 
ill-feeling  between  the  prisoners  themselves.  I  have  thus  far  assumed 
the  Chief  Justice's  statement  to  be  a  wholly  correct  statement  of  fact 
— that  the  professional  criminals  did  really  refuse  to  work  with  or 
speak  to  the  C.O.'s.  But  it  is  only  fair  to  add  that  I  have  interviewed 
various  Conscientious  Objectors  released  from  the  several  prisons  (in- 
cluding Kaingaroa),  and  in  no  instance  have  I  been  able  to  find 
substantiation  of  the  statement.  I  do  not  say  that  it  cannot  be 
substantiated.  I  merely  say  that  the  released  C.O.'s  I  have  inter- 
viewed knew  of  no  instance  where  professional  criminals  refused  to 
work  with  them.  On  the  contrary,  the  professionals  were  generally 
eager  to  work  in  association,  but  it  was  not  the  policy  of  the  Depart- 
ment to  permit  such  associated  work. 

In  another  paper  I  find  the  following  included  in.  a  report  of  the 
same  lecture:  "We  must  have  what  is  termed  a  State  or  a  public 
conscience,"  said  Sir  Robert  Stout.  "We  have  heard  much  of  late 
of  private  consciences.  It  is  well  to  have  a  conscience  of  some  kind; 
it  is  well  to  be  guided  by  moral  considerations;  but  if  a  man  or  a 
woman  sets  his  or  her  conscience  above  the  dictates  of  the  public 
conscience,  it  does  not  bespeak  an  exalted  moral  attitude." 

The  Chief  Justice — as  a  Rationalist  of  many  years'  standing,  as  a 
front-rank  Freethinker — must  know  that  a  State  conscience  is  some- 
thing which  can  have  no  existence.     Even  if  it  were  admitted  that  a 

.  168 


THE    PROBLEM    OF    TlIK    CONSCIKNCE. 

State  conscience  could  exist,  that  conscience  could  only  find  active 
expression  at  the  ballot-box.  In  Australia,  where  the  opportunity 
was  given,  the  "public  conscience"  declared  Conscription  to  be  wrong. 
In  this  country  a  handful  of  men  refused  to  permit  the  "public 
conscience"  to  express  itself,  and  set  their  minority  conscience  over 
the  dictates  of  the  "public  conscience"^which  explains,  I  suppose,  why 
we  "cannot  boast  an  exalted  moral  attitude."  So  that  the  C.O.'s 
are  not  really  in  conflict  with  the  public  conscience,  but  with  the 
conscience  of  a  minority  who  were  able  to  manipulate  the  govern- 
mental  machinery  in  a  way  which  prevented  the  "public  conscience" 
from  functioning.  I  might  digress  at  this  point  to  remark  that  if 
Sir  Robert  Stout  really  understood  the  historic  development  of  the 
State  his  utterances  would  be  differently  framed. 

Whether  we  accept  Christian,  semi-scientific,  or  scientific  defini- 
tions of  conscience.  Sir  Robert  Stout's  depreciation  of  the  "private 
conscience"  will  be  found  to  rest  on  no  foundation  whatever.  From 
almost  time  immemorial,  the  Churches  have  taught  that  "Conscience 
is  the  Voice  of  God."  We  have  been  told  from  the  cradle  to  the  grave 
that  if  our  conscience  tells  us  a  thing  is  wrong,  it  is  wrong — that  th  ■ 
still  small  voice  that  speaks  the  warning  is  the  voice  of  God's  owr. 
righteousness.  The  religious  writers  who  have  sought  to  reconcile 
science  with  religion  have  proclaimed  similarly.  "And  this  is  con- 
science, the  voice  of  the  law  of  God  within  us,  which  speaks  far 
more  strongly  than  the  outer  voice  of  the  praise  and  blame  of  others," 
says  Arabella  B.  Buckley,  in  "Moral  Teachings  of  Science."  "As  a 
man  thinketh  in  his  heart,  so  is  he,"  is  the  way  it  is  put  in  the 
Book  of  Proverbs.  "Conscience,"  says  Lord  Avebury,  "is  a  safe 
guide."  Browning  calls  it  "The  great  beacon-light  God  sets  in  all." 
Byron  says  something  similar: 

"Whatever  creed  be  taught  or  land  be  trod, 
Man's  conscience  is  the  voice  of  God." 

John  Stuart  Mill,  in  his  essay,  "On  Liberty."  demands  freedom  of 
conscience  without  restriction:  "This  then  is  the  appropriate  region 
of  human  liberty.  It  comprises  first  the  inward  domain  of  conscious- 
ness; demanding  liberty  of  conscience  in  the  most  comprehensive 
sense;  liberty  of  thought  and  feeling;  absolute  freedom  of  opinion  and 
sentiment  on  all  subjects,  practical  or  speculative,  scientific,  moral, 
or  theological.  ...  No  society  in  which  these  liberties  are  not,  on  the 
whole,  respected,  is  free,  whatever  its  form  of  Government,  and  none 
is  completely  free  in  whirh  they  do  m  exist  absolute  and  un- 
qualified." 

And  again:  ".\o  one  can  be  a  i;rfat  ttiinker  who  does  not  recog- 
nise that  as  a  thinker  it  i.s  hi.-^  fiist  duty  to  follow  his  intellect  to 
whatever  conclusions  it  may  lead.  Truth  gains  more  by  the  errors 
of  one  who.  with  due  study  and  preparation,  thinks  for  himrelf,  thar 

7  itifi 


ARMAGEDDON   OR  CALVARY. 

by  the  true  opinions  of  those  who  only  hold  them  because  they  do  not 
suffer  themselves  to  think." 

Sir  George  Greenwood,  M.P.,  in  "The  Problem  of  the  Will,"  issued 
by  Watts  and  Co.,  furnishes  a  Rationalist  definition:  "Conscience  is 
merely  what  one  thinks  in  a  particular  case  on  a  question  of  right 
and  wrong  with  reference  to  the  proposed  course  of  action.  It  is 
one's  judgment  on  a  question  of  practical  ethics.  .  .  .  He  who 
acts  against  the  voice  of  conscience  does  wrong  because  he ,  does 
what  he  thinks  to  be  wrong.  To  say  that  a  man  should  always 
follow  the  dictates  of  his  conscience  is  no  more  than  saying  that  he 
should  always  do  what  he  thinks  to  be  right.  Conscience,  therefore, 
is  always  a  safe  moral  guide  to  the  individual,  though  it  may^  make 
him  do  things  which  the  majority  of  mankind  think  foolish  or  111- 
adrised,  or  even  criminal." 

Finally,  in  his  "Riddle  of  the  Universe,"  the  great  German 
materialist.  Professor  Ernst  Haeckel,  to  whose  school  of  thought  Sir 
Robert  Stout  may  be  said  to  belong,  puts  it  this  way:  "We  now  know 
that  each  act  of  the  will  is  as  fatally  determined  by  the  organisation 
of  the  individual,  and  as  dependent  on  the  momentary  condition  of 
his  environment,  as  every  other  psychic  activity." 

Prom  every  viewpoint  Sir  Robert  Stout  was  wrong.  From  every 
viewpoint — whether  religious,  semi-scientific,  or  scientific — the  Con- 
scientious Objectors  were  right.  They  were  right  because  they  were 
following  the  promptings  of  their  own  conscience.  And  now  that  the 
hurricane  of  Hate  no  longer  rages  with  its  war-time  fury,  it  may  be 
noted  that  the  soldiers  who  heard  the  artillery  roar  along  the  line 
of  battle,  the  brave  men  who  with  a  laugh  on  their  lips  looked  Death 
in  the  face,  have  no  words  of  scorn  for  the  bona  fide  Conscien- 
tious Objectors.  The  soldiers  from  the  depths  of  their  own  souls' 
courage,  are  able  to  pay  sincere  tribute  to  other  brave  men  who  saw 
differently  from  themselves,  and  who,  seeing  differently,  were  called 
upon  to  "stand  alone"  through  terrible  hours  which  strained  every 
mental  and  physical  power  of  endurance.  Not  the  men  who  fought, 
and  fought  gallantly,  were  they  who  hurled  contumely  at  the  men  of 
conscience;  that  Hymn  of  Hate  was  reserved  to  be  sung  by  men — 
mostly  old  men — who  never  fought  either  Kruger  or  Kaiser  except 
with  goosequills  and  fountain  pens,  from  long  thousands  of  miles 
behind  the  guns. 

The  war  is  now  "ended,"  and  other  wars  are  either  threatening 
or  progressing.  The  Prussian  Militarists  failed  to  win,  but  Prussian 
Militarism  raises  triumphantly  and  detestably  its  head  in  every  land 
— insolently,  aggressively,  threateningly.  The  falsehood  that  the 
world  slaughter  was  a  "war  to  end  war"  stands  brazenly  naked  before 
the  bereaved  peoples.  Thunderclouds  of  revolution  are  rolling  up  the 
sky,  "whirlwinds  of  rebellion"  are  shaking  the  planet.  In  the  back- 
ground the  fathers  and  brothers,  the  mothers  and  wives,  the  sisters 
and  sweethearts,  and  the  orphaned  little  children,  are  sorrowing  dry- 

170 


THE  PROBLEM  OF  THE  CONSCIENCE. 

«yed  or  flooding  the  earth  with  their  tears.  The  countries  are 
counting  their  dead,  their  limbless,  sightless,  and  insane  men— com- 
piling their  records  of  human  wreckage  and  ruin.  The  soldiers  who 
fought  for  Freedom  stand  aghast  to  behold  her  in  shackles.  Th'j 
Democracy  they  bled  for  they  see  imperilled  by  the  stranglehold  of 
Privilege.  The  millions  who  mourn  their  millions  of  dead  are  Team- 
ing in  heartbreak  and  bitterness  that  in  the  world  war,  as  in  all 
wars,  the  people  have  suffered  defeat.  But  where  all  other  facts  are 
blurred  and  seen  as  through  a  glass  darkly,  one  fact  hurls  its  rays 
of  light  through  the  murkiness  like  a  star  of  the  first  magnitude. 
The  greater  victory — the  real  victory — of  the  war  years  was  won  by 
the  Conscientious  Objectors  of  all  countries.  The  Labour  Movement 
acclaims  their  courage  and  honesty.  The  Labor  Movement  denounce.s 
their  persecutors,  protests  against  the  vindictive  action  of  an  imre- 
presentative  Parliament  which  awarded  an  additional  punishment  of 
deprivation  of  civil  rights  on  top  of  a  multiplicity  of  other  and 
barbarous  punishments.  The  Labor  Movement  demands  the  immediate 
restoration  of  every  civil  right  to  the  Conscientious  Objectors,  and 
pledges  itself  to  work  unceasingly  for  such  restoration.  For  these 
men  with  their  high  sense  of  personal  responsibility  as  Citizens  of  the 
World  may  be  reckoned  among  the  nation's  best  assets.  Imperishably 
they  have  written  their  names  on  history's  scroll  of  heroes.  Professor 
Ward  is  right:  "A  nation  of  such  men  would  leaven  and  regenerat3 
the  world."  With  the  record  of  the  shocking  treatment  they  endured 
and  the  fortitude  with  which  they  faced  worse  than  death,  none  in 
future  days  will  dare  to  open  lying  lips  to  stigmatise  them  as 
cowards  and  shirkers.  There  would  be  no  dictionarial  term  that 
would  adequately  describe  the  slanderer  who  would  ascribe  cowardic3 
to  such  men.     They  have  vindicated  the  prophetic  faith  of  the  poet: 

"Truth    crushed    to   earth    shall    rise   again; 
The   eternal   years  of  God  are  hers; 
But  Error,  wounded,  writhes  in  pain 
And   dies  among  her  worshippers." 


THK    END. 


171 


APPENDICES. 

Appendices  I.  and  II.  are  reproduced  from  Australian  papers  for 
the  purpose  of  showing  that  the  statements  of  the  New  Zealand 
Conscientious  Objectors  regarding  the  barbarities  inflicted  upon 
themselves  have  not  been  exaggerated.  The  exposure  made  by  Mr. 
Corboys,  M.P.,  and  the  statement  of  Private  Sutton  (both  of  Australia) 
make  it  clear  that  military  rule  is  no  respector  of  persons.  The 
common  soldier,  whether  he  hailed  from  New  Zealand,  Australia,  or 
Britain,  was  not  always  exempted  from  the  atrocious  treatment  meted 
out  to  the  CO. 


APPENDIX    I. 

Mr.  Corboys,  an  Australian  .Member  of  Parliament,  who  went  tO 
the  war  as  a  volunteer,  made  the  following  statement  in  public  after 
his  return  from  active  service:  — 

"A  man  crimed  for  a  trivial  offence  was  awaiting  punishment.  He 
was  ill.  We  had  to  make  a  long  march  from  one  part  of  the  line  to 
another.  He  paraded  ill  before  the  doctor.  The  colonel  of  the  bat- 
talion, who  was  not  a  doctor,  said  that  the  man  was  malingering. 
They  got  a  rope  and  tied  him  behind  a  limber.  They  told  him  to 
march,  and  he  couldl  not  march;  and  they  dragged  him  for  miles 
behind  that  horse  limber,  along  cobblestone  roads.  He  was  cut  and 
bleeding  and  half  dead.  The  colonel  and  the  adjutant  rode  back  to 
him,  and  asked:  "Will  you  march  now?"  He  said:  'I  cannot  march;  I 
am  too  ill.'  Tluy  said:  'We'll  break  your  spirit;  we'll  make  you.' 
They  took  him  up  and  lashed  him  breast  high  with  the  rope  up  againsi 
the  back  of  the  cart,  and  dragged  him  along  in  that  manner.  That 
is  Prussianisni  for  you,  and  it  happened  in  an  Australian  battalion. 
It  was  my  own  battalion,  and  my  own  colonel  and  adjutant  were  the 
^'uiltv  officers." 


aimm:.\i)ix  ti. 

The  following  appeared  in  the  "Australian  Worker"  of  August  28, 
1919.  over  the  signature  of  ".\o.  llstJl,  Private  P.  II.  Sutton,  46th  Bat- 
talion. A.T.F." 

In  January,  1917.  T  was  doing  a  sentence  of  fourteen  days'  field 
punishment  (No.  2)  in  company  with  two  others.  This  punishment 
consists  of  being  contincd  to  the  uuard  room  and  parading  imder  the 
supervision  of  a  inovost   .^trgeani.      We  were  ordered  to  parade  with 

172 


ARMAGEDDON    OR  CALVARY. 

the  company,  fully  equipped  for  drill  purposes.  Considering  this  to 
be  a  contravention  of  the  King's  Regulations,  we  refused  to  carry  oui 
the  order.  We  appeared  before  Colonel  Lewis,  of  the  47th  Battalion, 
and  were  given  the  option  of  six  weeks'  imprisonment  or  being  tried 
by  courtmartial.  Two  of  my  mates,  one  of  whom  has  since  been  pro- 
moted lieutenant,  accepted  the  punishment,  whilst  I  requested  a 
courtmartial,  believing  myself  to  be  in  the  right. 

On  January  28  I  was  tried  and  sentenced  to  two  years'  hard  labour. 
I  paraded  four  times  to  Colonel  Lewis  and  begged  to  be  allowed  to  do 
the  sentence  in  the  front  line,  where  I  would  have  a  chance  of 
distinguishing  myself  and  receiving  a  pardon.  However,  this  was 
refused,  and  I  was  sent  to  Abboncourt  Military  Prison,  France.  The 
brutality  and  humiliation  suffered  caused  myself  and  several  other 
Australians  to  endeavour  to  escape  on  April  9.  I  was  recaptured  and 
brought  back  to  the  prison,  placed  in  a  cell  by  myself,  and  most 
brutally  treated.  I  was  placed  in  figure-eight  handcuffs,  and  on.-j 
military  policeman  struck  me  on  the  mouth  with  his  clenched  fist, 
breaking  four  of  my  teeth.  Another  policeman  also  punched  me  in 
the  face.  I  fought  back  as  well  as  possible,  but  had  no  chance,  and 
was  knocked  unconscious.  When  I  recovered,  I  was  given  a  bucket 
of  water  to  wash  the  blood  off,  and  was  taken  to  the  Governor,  who 
awarded  me  the  limit  punishment — 15  days'  P.D.  No.  1,  bread  and 
water  twice  daily,  and  42  days'  P.D.  No.  2,  which  means  bread  and 
water  twice  daily,  and  a  pint  of  porridge  in  addition,  also  28  days' 
crucifixion.  The  day  after  the  sentence  I  was  sent  to  No.  2  Military 
Prison,  Rouen,  and  immediately  placed  in  leg-irons  and  hessian 
trousers. 

Imagine  the  humiliation  of  a  man  who  had  left  his  country  with 
the  highest  ideals,  who  was  innocent  of  any  grave  offence,  bein^u 
placed  in  the  position  of  a  dangerous  criminal.  You  people  at  home, 
whilst  reading  of  our  victories  and  feats  of  arms  on  the  field,  could 
not  have  thought  it  possible  that  some  of  your  own  countrymen, 
perhaps  even  your  own  flesh  and  blood,  were  being  tortured  in  the 
military  prisons  of  France  and  England.  I  HAVE  SEEN  MEN  DIE 
FROM  THE  SCANDALOUS  TREATMENT  THEY  RECEIVED,  AND  I 
CAN  ALSO  GIVE  THE  NAMES  OF  TWO  MEN  WHO  PURPOSELY 
DESTROYED  THEIR  OWN  EYESIGHT  TO  ESCAPE  THE  HOR- 
RIBLE TORTURE,  WHICH  WAS  DRIVING  THEM   INSANE. 

I  will  give  a  few  authentic  cases  of  which  I  was  an  eye-witness 
in  the  Rouen  No.  2  M.P.  In  the  month  of  August,  1917,  35  Australians 
and  one  New  Zealander  soldier  asked  to  see  an  Australian  officer  in 
high  command,  who  was  visiting  the  prison,  with  a  view  to  having  the 
treatment  exposed.  •  This  interview  was  refused,  and  the  men  decider! 
to  do  no  more  work.  This  was  called  mutiny.  They  were  all  placed 
in  different  cells,  and  16  n.c.o.'s  of  the  M.P.S.C.  MOST  BRUTAI>LY 
FLOGGED  THEM.  AND  THEY  WERE  ALL  SENTENCED  TO  35 
DAYS'  BREAD  AND  WATER.     The  so-called  ringleaders  were  court- 

174 


APPKN  DICKS. 

martialled.  The  Australians,  Privates  Sheflield,  Mitchell,  Le  Guor, 
and  Little,  were  sentenced  to  life  terms,  AND  THK  NKW  ZKAI^XNDER 
AND  A  SCOTS  SOLDIER  WERF:  SENTENCED  TO  DEATH.  WHICH 
SENTENCE  WAS  DULY  CARRIED  OUT. 

In  July,  1917,  three  men,  namely  Private  Lackey  (of  the  l.^t  Bat- 
talion), Private  Cook  (of  the  24th),  and  Private  Dickey  (of  the  23rd 
Battalion),  A.I.F.,  escaped  from  the  prison.  They  were  recaptured  an'.l 
then  handcuffed  and  flogged  into  insensibility  with  a  sjambok.      This 

punishment    was     carried    out    by    Sergeant ,    of    the    M.P.S.C. 

assisted  by  Sergeant  ,  of  the  D.C.L.S.      The  unfortunate  victims 

were  then  placed  in  leg-irons  and  put  on  bread  and  water  for  a 
limited  period.  Privates  Rawlinson  and  Vetchelow,  for  the  same 
offence,    were    inflicted    with    the    same    punishment,    administered    by 

the  same  Sergeant ,  assisted   this  time  by  Sergeant ,  of 

the  Scottish  Rifles. 

Another  authentic  case  is  that  of  Private  Worby.  of  the  6th  A.L.H  , 
who,  in  company  with  Private  Connors,  of  the  1st  Battalion,  A.I.F , 
escaped  over  the  prison  wall  whilst  an  air  raid  was  in  progress.  The 
rope  broke,  and  Connors  broke  his  leg  in  the  fall.  His  comrade  car- 
ried him  a  distance  of  eight  kilnmetres  before  hcinu  ovtriakon  by  the 
military  police.  Worby  received  the  .'^anie  ircatincni  r.s  ti'.c  ott>rr3, 
but  Connors,  after  being  examined  by  a  medical  oflicer,  was  transferred 
to  a  casualty  clearing  station,  and  then  admitted  to  No.  10  Australian 
Military  Hospital  as  a  patient.  The  doctor's  orders  were  over-ruled, 
and  Connors  was  removed  to  prison,  where  he  was  placed  on  a 
stretcher  in  a  cell  by  himself.  The  only  convenience  provided  wa^ 
15  pares  away,  and  the  wretched  man  HAD  TO  CRxVWL  THIS  DIS- 
TANCE WITH  HIS  BROKEN  LIMB  TRAILING  ON  THE  GROUND. 
Ho  was  also  kept  on  hriad  and  water  for  the  limited  period. 

I  have  the  names  and  addresses  of  others  of  my  comrades  who 
have  been  victims  of  this  Hunnish  treatment,  and  now  the  war  ha^ 
been  won,  I  am  going  to  put  British  justice  to  the  test.  I  feel  confi- 
dent 1  can  look  to  the  R.S.S.  Labor  League  to  assist  me  in  raisins 
an  agitation  which  will  cause  to  brinu  about  an  inquiry  into  the 
treatment  nieied  out  to  the  Australian  soldiers  whilst  away  from  their 
country.  The  Australian  Government  should  call  on  the  Imperial 
authorities  for  an  explanation,  and  the  responsible  officials  should  be 
brought  to  hook  for  countenancing  sueii  an  awful  system. 

The  following  names  may  be  of  some  use  in  case  of  investigation: 
General  Humphreville  (Director-General  of  Military  Prisons  in 
France).  Colonel  Thomas,  .Majors  .Mooney,  Basher,  and  Dougles, 
Sergeant-Majois  Coon.  Dorkers,  and  Moran.  and  numerous  staff- 
sergeants  and  non-enins.  connected  with  the  British  military  police, 
whose  names  1  can  furnish.  I  can  also  bring  several  witnesses  (names 
supplied)  to  suhstani  iate  my  case,  who  are  prepared  to  give  sworu 
evidence  in  any  court   of  law. 

IT.'i 


ARMAGEDDON    OR  CALVARY. 

APPENDIX  III. 

The  Parliamentary  Order  Paper,  September  3,  1919,  contained  the 
following: — "Mr.  Holland  to  move:  That  there  be  laid  before  this 
House  a  return  showing — (1)  The  number  of  members  of  the  New 
Zealand  Expeditionary  Force  who,  whilst  on  active  service,  have  been 
sentenced  to  undergo  punishment;  (2)  the  number  who  actually 
served  sentences  so  inflicted,  and  the  nature  of  their  punishment;  (3) 
the  number  still  undergoing  punishment,  and  the  nature  of  thei-* 
sentences;  (4)  the  number  sentenced  to  death  by  order  of  court- 
martial;  (5)  the  number  of  cases  in  which  the  death  sentence  was 
actually  carried  out;  (6)  the  nature  of  the  alleged  offence  for  which 
soldiers  were  sentenced  to  either  punishment  or  death;  and  (7)  the 
names  of  the  officers  constituting  the  various  courtsmartial,  and 
whether  they  were  in  every  case  New  Zealand  officers."' 

In  my  Address-in-Reply  speech  on  Septembr  5,  I  said:  "Both  Briggs 
and  Baxter  have  said  that  when  they  first  refused  duty  in  France 
they  were  threatened  with  the  death  penalty.  The  General  Orders 
were  taken  down  and  shown  to  them,  and  those  orders,  according  to 
the  officers  who  showed  them,  purported  to  contain  lists  of  New 
Zealanders  who  were  courtmartialled  and  ordered  to  be  shot  for 
refusing  to  obey  orders." 


APPENDIX   IV. 

'Hansard"  of  September  5  contains  a  report  of  my  speech  on  the 
Address-in-Reply,  in  the  course  of  which  I  made  reference  to  the; 
Crampton  case  in  the  following  terms:  — 

"Honourable  members  will  remember  the  efforts  I  made  last 
session  to  have  Lieut.  Crampton's  case  dealt  with.  When  Mr.  Hewif., 
S.M.,  was  appointed  to  inquire  into  the  Crampton  case,  I  asked  that 
the  men  who  had  been  assaulted  should  have  the  right  of  representa- 
tion by  counsel  at  that  inquiry;  Mr.  McCombs  made  a  similar  request, 
but  it  was  refused.  The  Magistrate  went  into  the  matter  very  fully. 
The  men  concerned  had  been  scattered  from  prison  to  prison,  and  the 
guards  had  also  been  scattered.  The  Magistrate  visited  prison  after 
prison.  He  acted  as  fairly  as  a  man  could  act  under  the  circum- 
stances. He  brought  in  a  report  which  substantiated  the  charges  of 
cruelty,  and  which  vindicated  my  action  and  the  action  of  the  men 
who  made  the  charges  in  the  first  case.  Mr.  Hewitt  found  that  thj 
charges  against  Crampton  were  proved;  but  it  took  a  long  time  to 
got  the  report  laid  on  the  table  of  the  House.  After  it  was  placed 
before  the  House  we  endeavoured  to  get  the  Government  to  take 
action    on    it,    but    no    action    was    taken;    and    then,    instead    of     tho 

176 


APPENDICES. 

Government  giving  effect  to  the  recommendations  of  Mr.  Hewitt, 
instead  of  doing  what  they  ought  to  have  done — the  only  thing  they 
could  have  done  in  decency  at  that  stage,  namely,  get  rid  of  Lieu'. 
Crampton  as  military  offlcer — they  set  up  a  courtmartial  to  try 
Crampton,  a  courtmartial  that  was  nothing  more  or  less  than  a  piece 
of  whitewashing  machinery  to  save  l.ieut.  Cranipton's  position.  No 
member  of  that  Court  betrayed  any  knowledge  of  the  military  law. 
The  Judge-Advocate  was  better  counsel  for  Crampton  than  the  lawyei 
who  was  employed  to  defend  him.  The  men  who  were  the  victims 
of  the  atrocities  were  not  allowed  representation  by  counsel,  and  ai 
least  one  important  witness  was  not  presented.  .  .  .  The  prose- 
cutor was  the  one  man  who  seemed  to  me  to  come  out  of  the  business 
with  credit  to  himself.  After  the  courtmartial,  and  without  any 
explanation  either  in  this  House  or  to  the  people  of  this  country  ai* 
to  why  they  did  it,  the  Government,  altogether  ignoring  the  scathin  ; 
report  of  the  Magistrate,  Mr.  Hewitt,  proceeded  to  appoint  Lieut. 
Crampton  Area  OfRccr  at  Wanganui,  where,  notwithstanding  that 
unsavoury  record  of  his  which  comes  from  Samoa,  he  will  have  charge 
of  very  many  boys  in  the  period  of  adolescence.  Previously  I  mad. 
demands  in  this  House  for  the  production  of  the  papers  in  connection 
with  Lieut.  Cranipton's  trial  at  Samoa.  The  .Minister  replied  to  me 
that  he  would  place  on  the  table  of  the  House  such  of  those  papers 
as  were  not  confidential.  The  papers  have  not  yet  been  laid  on  the 
table,  and  I  want  to  know  what  portion  of  the  papers  will  be 
regarded  as  confidontial.  Will  that  portion  be  so  regarded  which 
had  to  do  with  Lieut.  Cranipton's  own  admissions  at  his  trial  by 
courtmartial  at  Samoa"?  This  matter  of  the  Defence  Department'.- 
action  in  connection  with  Lieut.  Crampton  is  something  which  th-' 
House  cannot  afford  to  pass  over  very  IJLihtly:  .sooner  or  later 
explanations  will  have  to  iie  made,  and  sooner  or  later  something  will 
have  to  lie  done  to  deterinino  Lieut.  Crampion's  connection  with  the 
Defence   Forces." 

AI'PKXDIX  \'. 

The  followini;  stattincni  conreniinu  a  .New  Zealand  incident  was 
lirinted  in  "Truth"  newspaper  durinu  .July,  litlS:-- 

On  the  niorninu  of  'l"lnirsda\,  .June  27.  at  six  o'clot  k.  a  raid  by  the 
military  and  civil  police  was  made  on  this  scruh-ciutinu  camp  in  th-^ 
following  manner:  .As  I  was  aboin  on(-  of  the  first  nun  lo  rise  from 
my  tent,  after  the  uonu  had  been  sounded  for  breakfast,  for  the  pur- 
pose of  havinu  ihv  usual  inorninu's  wash.  I  was  accosted  by  a  nm 
in  civilian  clothes,  who  was  armed  with  a  rille.  and  uave  the  order  to 
"Stand,  or  I'll  shooi."  Thinkiiiu  i'  merely  a  joke  on  the  part  of  on^^ 
of  my  fellow- workers.  I  still  jiroct  eded,  towel  over  my  arm.  towards 
the  creek,  a  distance  of  about  half  a  chain  from  the  tent.       1  had  only 


ARMAGEDDON    OR  CALVARY. 

got  about  halfway  when  I  was  suddenly  struck  down  from  behind  with 
a  baton,  inflicting  a  wound  an  inch  long  on  the  crown  of  my  head. 
While  I  was  down  I  was  again  struck  several  times  with  the  same 
weapon,  and  afterwards  kicked  on  the  thigh,  which  also  shows  two 
ugly  bruises.  Naturally,  the  brutal  treatment  I  was  receiving  caused 
me  to  call  for  help,  and,  on  one  or  two  men  coming  out  of  their  tents, 
they  were  met  with  a  cry  of  "You  will  be  all  treated  alike,"  this 
coming  from  another  man,  also  in  civilian  clothes,  who,  at  the  same 
time,  brandished  a  revolver  in  a  threatening  manner.  One  of  my 
fellow-workers  then  asked  what  was  the  matter,  and  why  they  were 
attacking  me.  It  was  only  then  that  they  announced  who  they  were,, 
and  their  object  for  being  there.  I  then  asked:  "Why  did  you  not 
let  me  know  who  you  are?"  He  then  said  to  me:  "You  are  a 
deserter."  By  this  time  I  was  handcuffed  and  then  marched  to  the 
mess  galley,  where  most  of  the  other  men  had  been  marched.  On 
the  way  to  the  mess  galley  they  told  me  that  I  could  consider  myself 
a  very  lucky  man  for  not  being  shot,  as  they  had  orders  to  shoot  if 
anyone  resisted.  This  I  considered  was  very  poor  consolation  for  tho 
brutal  treatment  I  had  received.  When  I  arrived  in  the  mess  galley 
covered  with  blood — face,  neck,  head,  and  clothes — I  was  still  hand- 
cuffed. The  cook  bathed  my  face,  and  it  was  only  after  the  cook 
had  asked  several  times  of  one  of  the  officers  to  take  the  handcuffs 
off,  in  order  that  I  might  change  my  saturated  blood-stained  clothe.s, 
that  they  were  removed.  The  result  of  the  brutal  attack  naturallv 
caused  me  severe  pain  and  sleepless  nights,  not  mentioning  the  loss 
of  time  and  money  through  not  being  in  a  fit  condition  to  work.  In 
addition,  I  also  lost  my  speech  for  one  day,  caused  through  callin-j 
for  assistance,  and  could  only  make  myself  understood  in  a  very  low 
whisper.  There  was  absolutely  no  attempt  to  evade  or  molest  any  of 
the  officers,  neither  before  nor  after  they  announced  their  calling 
and  their  object.  If  such  unnecessary  and  brutal  conduct  is  adopted 
in  every  instance  when  a  raid  is  being  made,  it  is  a  slur  on  the 
traditional   "British   Fair  Play   and  Justice."      Another  matter  worth 

mentioning  is  the  language  used,  one  man  being  called  a ■-  ■ 

without  any  provocation,  by  a  military  policeman,  who,  at  the  same 
time,  presented  a  fi.xed  bayonet,  such  language  being  no  credit  to  any 
man  wearing  the  King's  uniform.  This  camp  life  is  hard  and 
strenuous  enough,  as  anyone  who  has  ever  tried  it  knows,  and 
surely  because  I  am  working  in  the  back-blocks  that  is  no  reason 
why  any  officer  should  take  advantage  of  a  man's  position  to  treat 
him  like  a  wild  dog.  The  work  done  here  is  extremely  valuable  to 
the  country,  and  it  is  time  some  people  recognised  the  fact,  instead 
of  sneering  at  the  man  who  sacrifices  all  comforts  to  work  as  he  does 
for  an  honest  living.  In  conclusion,  it  may  be  stated  that  every  man 
in  this  camp  had  his  military  papers  (self  in  particular  classed  C2), 
or  gave  a  satisfactory  explanation  of  himself,  which  should  prove  to 
you  that  none  of  the  men  had  anything  to  fear  from  a  raid  from  the 

178 


APPENDICES. 

military  officers.  I  hope  that  there  will  be  a  full  inquiry  made  intf> 
the  matter  herein  referred  to  and  sonic  compensation  j^ranted  to  me 
for  the  personal  injury  I  received,  from  the  effects  of  which  I  am  still 
suffering;,  and  the  loss  of  time  from   work. — Yours,  etc., 

PATRICK   HEALKY. 
Vouchins   for   the  truth  of  the  above  statement   are   the   foliowini; 
signatures:   Ernest  Keenan,  Georne  Bush,  Harry  McNae,  K.  Waltanen, 
F.    Nelson,   F.   McClure,   Frank   Anson,   Victor   Manninen,   S.    Hriksen. 
William  Lyndhurst,  A.  J.  Collier,  J.  Norman. 


A1»PFADIX   VI. 

During  the  first  quarter  of  li)18,  the  Hon.  T.  M.  Wilford  appeared 
in  a  new  role,  namely,  that  of  the  censoi-  of  prison  reading,  and  in 
his  wisdom,  concluded  that  "Stead's  Review"  must  not  be  read  by 
military  prisoners,  the  reason  being  that  it  was  "so  depressing;"  and 
presumably  not  calculated  to  induce  anti-conscriptionists  to  reconsider 
their  attitude.  Here  follows  some  interesting  correspondence  on  the 
subject :  — 

Hon.  Sii'  James    Allen,  K.C..M.G..  .Minister  of   Defence,   Wellington. 

Dear  Sir, — A  client  of  mine,  who  is  serving  a  sentence  under  the 
Military  Service  Act  and  is  now  detained  at  Waimarino  Prison  Camp, 
has  written  a  letter  to  me.  Since  his  imprisonment,  ho  arran.e:ed  with 
me  for  the  supply  of  certain  books,  masazines,  and  papers,  includin.g, 
inter  alia.  "Stead's  Review."  He  now  writes  me  a  letter  intimating 
that  "Stead's  Review"  is  not  admitted  to  the  prison,  but  that  an 
Australian  ma.uazine  called  "Life"  and  matter  of  a  kindred  type  is 
admitted.  .My  client  has  not  written  to  complain  of  this,  but  mention? 
it  incidentally.  It  seems  to  be  an  extraordinary  thin;:  that  "Stead's 
Review  "  should  l)e  denied  admission  while  "Life"  is  admitted,  and  I 
shall  be  glad  to  hear  from  you  the  reason  of  this  iirohibitioii  and 
discrimination,  and  whether  it  is  likely  to  he  coiiiiiund  1  have  the 
honour.  Sir.  to  remain,  yours  trit'.y.   1'.  ,1.  0'R1;GA.\ 

February  13th,  li)18. 

P.   J'.   O'Reuan,   Esq.,  Barrister  and    Solicitor.   Wclliimiiui. 

Dear  Sii',- -  1  am  in  rec(>iiit  of  yniii-  htici-  of  ilu  i:!th  instant  re- 
garding; the  admission  of  the  juililicat  ion.  "Stead's  Review."  to  the 
Prison  Cauip  at  Waimarino. 

In  reply.  I  have  to  inform  you  that  'his  is  a  inaiici'  which  is  not 
within  the  control  of  my  |)(|>ariin(  nt .  and  would  r(  ter  you  to  the 
Minister  in  Charge  of  the  Piisons  1  >(  paitincnt.  the  Hon.  T.  .M.  Wilford, 
who  will,  doubtless,  be  ablt>  to  sujM>ly  yyi  with  the  neccs.sary  informa- 
tion.- Yours  faithfully.  .1.  ,\I.l.i:.\.   Minister  of  Defence. 

L't'-th  February.  l!t1S. 

17:i 


AKMAGEDDON    OR  CALVARY. 

Hon.  T.  M.  Wilford,  Minister  of  Justice,  Wellington. 

Dear  Sir, — A  client  of  mine,  Mr.  P.  Cody,  who  is  at  present  serving 
a  sentence  in  the  Prison  Camp  at  Waimarino,  has  written  to  me  to 
the  effect  that  "Stead's  Review,"  to  which  he  is  a  subscriber,  has  been 
denied  admission  to  the  prison.  He  adds  that  another  publication 
called  "Life,"  and  similar  periodicals,  are  still  admitted.  I  wrote  to 
the  Minister  of  Defence  directly  after  hearing  from  Mr.  Cody,  but  he 
has  now  written  me  to  the  effect  that  it  is  a  matter  for  you.  I  shall 
be  glad  to  hear  whether  "Stead's  Review"  has,  in  fact,  been  prohibited 
from  admission  to  my  client,  and  if  so,  why?  Thanking  you  in  antici- 
pation of  an  early  reply. — Yours  truly,  P.  J.  O'REGAN. 

4th  March,  1918. 

P.  J.  O'Regan,  Esq.,  Wellington. 

Dear  Sir,- — I  have  to  acknowledge  the  receipt  of  your  letter  of  th3 
4th  instant,  in  reference  to  the  complaint  made  to  you  by  P.  Cody,  at 
present  undergoing  sentence  at  the  ^'aimarino  Prison  Camp,  of  his  not 
being  allowed  to  receive  "Stead's  Review." 

In  reply,  I  have  to  inform  you  that  the  matter  is  receiving  carefui 
consideration.— Yours  faithfully,  THOMAS  M.  WILFORD. 

5th  March,  1918. 

Hon.  T.  M.  Wilford,  Minister  of  Justice,  Wellington. 

Dear  Sir,^ — I  wrote  you  herein  on  the  4th  March  last  and  received 
an  acknowledgment  from  you  dated  the  5th,  in  which  you  stated  that 
the  matter  was  receiving  consideration,  but,  so  far,  have  received  no 
further  reply. 

I  would  point  out  that  in  my  first  letter  I  asked  for  no  consideration 
whatever,  but  simply  made  an  inquiry  whether  it  was  correct  that 
while  "Life"  and  similar  periodicals  were  allowed  admission  to  mili- 
tary prisons,  "Stead's  Review"  was  denied  admission.  I  mentionei 
the  fact  that  a  client  of  mine  then  imprisoned,  Mr.  P.  Cody,  had  written 
to  me  to  the  effect  that  the  "Review"  was  refused  admission  to  him, 
and  my  object  wag  to  ascertain  whether  this  was  due  to  the  settled 
policy  of  the  Department,  or  whether  it  was  due  merely  to  inad- 
vertence. To  my  inquiry  no  reply  has  yet  been  vouchsafed,  and  I  be^: 
respectfully  to  repeat  it.  Thanking  you  in  anticipation. — Yours  trul.v, 
P.  J.  O'REGAN. 

28th  May,  1918. 

P.  J.  O'Regan"  Esq.,  Wellington. 

Dear  Sir, — I  have  to  acknowledge  the  receipt  of  your  letter  of  th-,' 
28th  ultimo  in  reference  to  the  publication,  "Stead's  Review." 

In  reply,  I  beg  to  inform  you  that  the  circulation  of  "Stead's 
Review  "  in  the  prisons  has  been  stopped  because  I  consider  it  i.s  ?■■> 
depressing.— I  am.  Yours  truly,  THO.MAS  .M.  WILFORD. 

1st  June,  1918. 

180 


APPENDICES. 

Hon.  T.  M.  Wilford.  Minister  of  Justice.  Wellington. 

Dear  Sir, — I  duly  received  your  letter  of  the  1st  inst.,  and  I 
note  that  the  circulation  of  the  "Review"  in  the  prisons  has  been 
stopped  because  you  consider  it  "so  depressins."  I  respectfully 
submit  that  this  information  could  have  been  vouchsafed  to  me  when 
I  wrote  to  you  4th  March  last.  Under  the  circumstances,  I  am 
tempted  to  conclude  that  your  reply  dated  the  5th  of  that  month  was 
dictated  by  the  hope  that  I  would  not  return  for  further  information. 

It  will,  no  doubt,  come  in  the  nature  of  a  surprise  to  many  people 
that  a  Liberal  Minister  should  have  signalised  his  accession  to  office 
by  preventing  the  circulation  of  a  periodical  so  dispassionate,  accurate, 
cultured,  and  influential   as  "Stead's   Review." 

In  my  previous  communication  I  mentioned,  incidentally,  that  no 
embargo  whatever  had  been  placed  upon  the  circulation  in  the  prison 
of  "Life,"  an  Australian  publication.  Doubtless  the  vaticinations  of 
the  Rev.  Dr.  Fitchett  are  not  "so  depressing,"  though  it  is  submitted 
that  in  so  far  as  the  war  is  concerned,  they  are  woefully  inaccurate. 
The  point,  however,  which  concerns  my  client,  Mr.  Cody,  and  men  of 
his  race  and  religion,  is  that  "Life"  is  inspired  by  a  spirit  of  sustained 
venom  and  hatred  of  everything  pertaining  to  Ireland  and  the  Catholic 
Church,  and,  under  the  circumstances,  I  cannot  repress  a  feeling  or 
surprise  at  the  discrimination  you  have  seen  fit  to  exercise.  It  is  to 
the  lasting  cretlit  of  Mr.  Stead  that  nothing  ever  appeared  in  his 
"Review"  calculated  to  wound  the  patriotic  or  religious  susceptibilities 
of  any  section  of  the  community. 

I  consider  the  matter  of  such  public  importance  that  it  is  my  inten- 
tion to  publish  the  whole  of  this  correspondence. — Yours  truly.  P.  J. 
OREGAN. 

U'lh  June,   1918. 


P.  J.  O'Regan,  Ksq.,  Solicitor,  Wellington. 

Dear  .Mr.  O'Regan, — I  have  to  acknowledge  the  receipt  of  your 
letter  of  the  12th  instant. 

In  reference  to  your  conclusions  as  to  my  last  letter  to  yourself, 
1  can  assure  you  that  the  same  are  erroneous,  and  such  reply  was 
not  dictated  by  the  hope  suggested  in  yours  of  the  12th — I  would  not. 
so  misjudge  you. 

Your  reference  to  "Stead's  Review"  and  to  your  client,  Mr.  Cody, 
show,  in  my  opinion,  an  absence  of  logical  reasoning.  If.  as  you  say, 
nothing  appears  in  .Mr.  Stead's  "Review"  calculated  to  wound  the 
religious  susceptibilities  of  any  section  of  the  comtnunity.  how  can 
you  argue  that  any  question  nf  religion  was  in  my  iniiKi  when  "Stead's 
Review"  was  being  dealt  with'.'  On  your  own  statement  you  are 
surely  answered. 

I  still  believe  that  "Sirad's  Review"  is  depressing,  and  in  this  time 
of  crisis   and   stress.   I    tirnily   and   thoroughly  believe   that   only   those 

ISl 


ARMAGEDDON    OR  CALVARY. 

efforts  which  go  to  help  and  aid  "Our  King  and  Empire"  should  be 
encouraged.     My  opinion  is  that  Stead's  magazine  weakens  effort. 

I  shall  certainly  have  no  objection  to  your  publishing  this  corres- 
pondence.—I  am,  yours  truly,  THOMAS  M.  WILFORD. 

17th  June,  1918. 

Hon.  T.  M.  Wilford,  Minister  of  Justice,  Wellington. 

Dear  Sir, — I  beg  to  acknowledge  receipt  of  yours  of  the  17th  inst., 
herein.  I  am  glad  to  have  your  assurance  that  I  was  in  error  in 
suggesting  that  you  could  have  given  me  at  once  the  information  I 
sought  in  my  letter  of  March  4th  last.  It  is  hardly  necessary  to  add 
that  I  do  not  suggest  that  you  have  been  influenced  in  the  slightest 
degree  by  any  disregard  of  the  religious  feelings  of  any  section  of 
the  community.  I  thought,  and  still  think,  however,  that  it  is  not  a 
little  remarkable  that  no  objection  should  be  taken  to  such  a  pro- 
duction as  "Life,"  the  bias  of  which,  in  the  direction  mentioned  in 
my  previous  letter,  is  obvious  and  notorious. 

Needless  to  say,  I  do  not  propose  discussing  "Stead's  Review"  with 
you.  The  correspondence  has  removed  the  scepticism  I  felt  at  the 
outset,  when  I  was  invited  to  believe  that  a  Liberal  Minister  of  the 
Crown  had  seen  fit  to  place  such  a  magazine  as  "Stead's  Review"  on 
the  Index  of  Imperialism. — Yours  truly,  P.  J.  O'REGAN. 

18th  June,  1918. 


APPENDIX   VII. 

The  Parliamentary  Order  Paper,  September  3,  contained  the  fol- 
lowing question  and  answer:  — 

Mr.  Holland  (Grey)  to  ask  the  Minister  of  Defence:  "Whether,  in 
view  of  the  fact  that  peace  had  been  declared,  the  Government  will 
consider  the  advisability  of  granting  a  general  amnesty  to  soldiers 
undergoing  imprisonment,  and  to  other  military  offenders  either 
undergoing  or  liable  to  imprisonment." 

The  Hon.  Sir  James  Allen,  Minister  of  Defence,  replied:  "It  is  not 
possible  to  grant  a  general  amensty  to  all  soldiers  at  present  under- 
going imprisonment  for  offences  committed  overseas,  as  these  unfor- 
tunately include  a  small  proportion  of  serious  criminal  cases,  and 
it  is  not  considered  that  the  declaration  of  peace  warrants  complete 
remission  in  all  cases.  Whenever  a  soldier  arrives  in  the  Dominion 
as  a  prisoner,  his  case  is  fully  reviewed,  and,  wherever  possible,  he 
is  given  his  freedom.  In  fact,  at  present,  there  is  no  soldier  under- 
going a  sentence  of  imprisonment  in  New  Zealand  for  an  offence 
committed  on  active  service  overseas,  but  I  am  afraid  there  are  a  few 
still  to  come  out  whose  cases  will  not  justify  a  complete  remission. 
So  far  as  the  military  defaulters  and  shirkers  are  concerned,  I  may 
state  that  while  orders  have  been  given  for  the  release  of  all  those 

182 


APPENDICKS. 

who  have  been  classified  as  bona  fide  religious  objectors  by  the 
special  Board,  and  those  who  were  serving  a  second  or  third  sen- 
tence for  offences  under  the  Military  Service  Act,  the  Government 
does  not  at  present  intend  to  remit  the  sentences  of  those  who  refused 
service  for  other  reasons  or  to  cease  the  prosecution  of  those  who 
have  so  far  evaded  arrest." 

This  means  that  the  Government  denies  the  right  of  Conscience 
to  the  Socialist,  the  Irishman,  the  Maori,  and  the  Christian  other  than 
the  Christian  as  narrowly  defined  by  the  Military  Service  Act.  It 
also  means  that  the  pursuit  of  the  men  with  conscientious  objections 
to  military  service  is  to  be  carried  to  its  vicious  extreme. 


APPENDIX  VIII. 

Since  the  main  pages  of  this  book  have  been  in  print  quite  a 
number  of  C.O.'s  therein  recorded  as  "still  in  prison"  have  been 
released  as  a  result  of  their  sentences  expiring  on  the  one  hand  and 
of  small  remissions  on  the  other. 

Among  those  released  as  a  result  of  expiry  of  sentence  is  Mr. 
P.  C.  Webb,  ex-M.P.  for  Grey.  Mr.  Webb  has  been  accorded  a 
tremendous  welcome  at  Auckland  (where  two  theatres  failed  to  ac- 
commodate the  thousands  who  assembled  to  greet  him,  at  Wellington 
(where  one  of  the  largest  theatres  was  packed  to  the  doors  before 
7.30,  and  many  hundreds  were  turned  away),  at  Christchurch,  and 
at  GrejTnouth  (where  the  citizens  made  his  return  the  occasion  of  one 
^f  the  most  remarkable  demonstrations  ever  held  in  New  Zealand). 


183 


PUBLICATIONS  BY  H.  E.  HOLLAND,  M.P. 

~  SAMOA 

A  Story  that  Teems  with  Tragedy 

A  Record  of  the  agony  of  a  Primitive  People  and  their 

heroic  struggles  for  Freedom. 

A  Record  of  Treaties  made  and  torn  up. 

A  Record  of  the  Island  Conflict  of  German,  American,  and 

British  Trading  Interests. 

A  Statement  of  Labour's  Position  re  the  Control  of 

Samoa. 

PRICE  :  3d.    Per  dozen,  2/6. 


ARMAGEDDON  OR  CALVARY :  The  Alternative  for  the 

Conscientious  01)jectors  of  New  Zealand.    Price,  2/ 
THE  TRAGIC  STORY  OF  THE  WAIHI  STRIKE.      (In 

collaboration  with  "Ballot  Box"  and  R.   S.  Ross.) 

Paper,  6d. ;  cloth,  2/-. 
SEDITION:    Holland's    Speech    from    Dock    in    1914. 

Price,  Id. 
LABOUR  AND  THE  FUSION :  Should  the  Labour  Party 

have  joined  the  National  Government?     Debate  with 

John  Payne,  M.P.      Price,  2d. 
THE  COMMUNE  OF  PARIS:  The  First  Great  Socialist 

Revolution.     Price,  3d. 
LABOUR'S      CHALLENGE      TO      THE      NATIONAL 

GOVERNMENT:    Speech   on   the   Address-in-Reply, 

House  of  Representatives,  October,  1918.    Price,  3d. 


IN    THE    PRESS. 

PATRIOTS  AND  PROFITEERS*  A  Second  Chapter  of 
N.Z.  War  Profits. 

THE  PEACE  TERMS :  The  War  Foundations  they  Build. 
Price,  3d. 

BOY  CONSCRIPTION  AND  CAMP  MORALITY:  The 
case  against  Sir  James  Allen's  proposal  for  the  Four 
Months'  Camp  Conscription  of  18-year-old  boys. 
Price,  3d. 

FOUNDATION  PRINCIPLES  OF  SOCIALISM:  A 
Summary  of  Marxian  Theory  of  Value  and  a  State- 
ment of  Labour's  Objective.     Price,  3d. 


TO   BE    PI^BLTSHED. 
IRELAND'S  FAMINES  AND  REBELLIONS:    The  Ripe 

Fruit  of  Seven  Hundred  Years  of  Bonda<ie. 


Ill  HI!  mm 


A    ooT'S"??^'  , 


^^ 


^^  I  I  i,)N^H»N.    N./. 


I'rintvtl  hj  I  b»'  Maori- 
land  >\ork<^r  PriHt'iHt' 
Slid  Piihlisliiii;  Ch^ 
rtH..  •.*t»H  Mak^rtrH 
::      ::     ^tr«»r(      ::      :: 


